Consider the given statement to be true and decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statement. Statement: Conclusions: 2. Government should create awareness about ill effects of public smoking.
Public smoking has increased in the current year.
1. Government should ban public smoking.
Neither 1 nor 2 follows.
Analyzing the Public Smoking Statement and Conclusions
Let's carefully examine the given statement and the conclusions to determine which one, if any, logically follows.
The Statement:
- Public smoking has increased in the current year.
This statement presents a simple observation or a factual claim about a trend. It tells us that the quantity or frequency of public smoking is higher this year compared to a previous period (implied by "increased"). It does not provide any information about the reasons for the increase, the effects of public smoking, or what actions should be taken.
The Conclusions:
- Government should ban public smoking.
- Government should create awareness about ill effects of public smoking.
These conclusions are policy recommendations or suggestions for action that the government should take. They are prescriptive statements, suggesting what ought to be done.
Examining Conclusion 1: Banning Public Smoking
Conclusion 1 suggests that the government should ban public smoking. Does the statement "Public smoking has increased" logically lead to this conclusion? Not necessarily.
- The statement only informs us about an increase in public smoking.
- It does not tell us if public smoking is harmful.
- It does not tell us if a ban is the most effective or appropriate response to an increase, even if it were harmful.
- Logical deduction requires the conclusion to be necessarily true if the premise is true. The increase in smoking does not make a ban a logical necessity based solely on the statement.
For Conclusion 1 to logically follow, the statement would need to include information connecting the increase to reasons for banning (e.g., "Increased public smoking is causing severe health problems," or "Any level of public smoking is harmful and its increase necessitates a ban"). Since this information is missing, Conclusion 1 does not logically follow from the statement alone.
Examining Conclusion 2: Creating Awareness about Ill Effects
Conclusion 2 suggests that the government should create awareness about the ill effects of public smoking. Does the statement "Public smoking has increased" logically lead to this conclusion? Again, not necessarily.
- The statement only notes an increase in the activity.
- It does not state that public smoking has ill effects.
- It does not state that lack of awareness is the reason for the increase.
- While creating awareness might be a reasonable action to take in response to increased smoking, it is not a logical deduction based *only* on the fact that smoking has increased.
Similar to Conclusion 1, for Conclusion 2 to logically follow, the statement would need additional premises, such as "Public smoking has significant ill effects, and an increase in it suggests a need for greater public awareness." The original statement lacks this crucial information.
Conclusion: Logical Inference from the Statement
Logical reasoning requires drawing inferences that are strictly supported by the premises. The statement provides a fact about an increase in public smoking. The conclusions offer potential actions or policies. Deriving an action ("should do this") from a purely descriptive observation ("this is happening") is generally not considered a strict logical inference without additional information or assumed premises about values, consequences, or goals.
Neither conclusion logically follows from the statement because the statement simply describes a trend and does not provide the necessary information about harm, effectiveness of actions, or reasons for policy intervention that would make either conclusion a logical necessity.
Revision Table: Understanding Logic Questions
| Concept | Explanation | Relation to Public Smoking Question |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | A piece of information given as true (a premise). | "Public smoking has increased in the current year." |
| Conclusion | An inference or claim that supposedly follows from the statement(s). | Policy suggestions (ban, awareness). |
| Logically Follows | The conclusion must be true if the statement(s) is/are true. The relationship is necessary. | Does the statement necessitate the conclusion? No, in this case. |
| Assumption | Information taken for granted but not explicitly stated. | Assuming public smoking is harmful, assuming government's role, etc., are assumptions not in the statement. |
Additional Information: Logic vs. Prescription
This question highlights the difference between descriptive statements and prescriptive statements in logical reasoning.
- Descriptive statements describe how the world *is*. Example: "The sky is blue." "Public smoking has increased."
- Prescriptive statements prescribe how the world *should be* or what action *should be taken*. Example: "You should study hard." "Government should ban smoking."
In formal logic, you cannot logically derive a "should" statement (prescription) solely from an "is" statement (description) without including a premise that links the description to a prescription. This is sometimes referred to as the "is-ought problem."
The statement about the increase in public smoking is purely descriptive. The conclusions are prescriptive. Without additional premises that bridge the gap between the observed increase and the recommended actions, the conclusions do not logically follow. While the conclusions might seem like reasonable actions in the real world, based on common knowledge about smoking and health, logical reasoning tests require you to stick strictly to the information provided in the statement.
Similar Questions
Consider the given question and decide which of the following statements is sufficient to answer the question.
How long will X take to build the wall?
Statements:
1. X and Y together can build the wall in 8 days.
2. X takes 5 days more than Y to build the wall.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
All clothes are rings.
No cloth is a bottle.
Conclusions:
(I) Some rings are bottles.
(II) Some rings are clothes.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
All engines are rockets.
All planes are rockets.
Conclusions:
(I) Some engines are planes.
(II) All planes are engines.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
Some snakes are lizards.
All roosters are lizards.
Conclusions:
(I) All lizards are roosters.
(II) No roosters are snakes.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
No horses are mirrors.
Some lizards are horses.
Conclusions:
(I) Some horses are not lizards.
(II) Some lizards are not mirrors.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
Some ribbons are balloons.
Some balloons are eagles.
Conclusions:
(I) All eagles are ribbons.
(II) No ribbons are eagles.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and decide which conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the given statements.
Statements:
Some trees are flowers.
All flowers are leaves.
Conclusions:
(I) All leaves are trees.
(II) All flowers are trees.
Given below is a statement followed by two conclusion numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, even if it appears at variance from commonly known facts. Then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them information given in the statement.
Statement:
A research found that if high school students get eight hours of sleep instead of 6 hours before exam, then their marks improve by 20%
Conclusions:
I. Eight hours of sleep is better than six hours of sleep if a student wants better marks.
II. Student are stressed as all exams are tough.
Decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the information given in the statement.
Statements:
Poverty is increasing because politicians don’t understand poverty, nor do they know anything about the problems faced by the poor.
Conclusions:
- All politicians should be replaced.
- All politicians should be asked to live in poor conditions.
Consider the given statement to be true and decide which of the conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the statement.
Statement:
Weight is also a force.
Conclusions:
1. The unit of weight is Newton.
2. The unit of weight is Kilogram.
Important Questions from Statements and Conclusions
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. All A are B.
II. Some B are C.
Conclusions:
I. Some A are C.
II. Some A are not C.
III. Some A are B.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully and decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements.
Statement:
A asked C, "What time is it now?" Is it half past two? ''
Conclusions:
1. A wants to go to lunch.
2. A wants to confirm what the time is because his watch is off.
In the question one statement is given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements.
Statement : 55% of Manisha's office colleagues went to watch the movie.
Conclusion I : Manisha went to watch the movie.
Conclusion II : Manisha did not go to watch the movie.
In the question two statements are given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements.
Statement 1 : All schools are books.
Statement 2 : No books are papers.
Conclusion I : No schools are books.
Conclusion II : Some books are schools.
In the question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be different from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements.
Statements:
I. Some P are Q.
II. All P are N.
Conclusion:
I. All Q are N.
II. Some P are not Q.
