Statement:
If A was there in XYZ cricket team, XYZ would have been the invincible team in the world.
Conclusion:
I. Without A, XYZ cannot win.
II. A is more talented than anyone else in the XYZ cricket team
The statement is a conditional one: "If A was there in XYZ cricket team, XYZ would have been the invincible team in the world."
This means: A in team implies XYZ is invincible.
It does not state:
Conclusion I: Without A, XYZ cannot win.
The original statement only tells us the outcome (invincible) if A is present. It provides no information about whether XYZ can win or lose if A is absent. They might still win, or they might lose. Therefore, we cannot logically conclude that they "cannot win" without A.
Result: Conclusion I does not follow.
Conclusion II: A is more talented than anyone else in the XYZ cricket team.
The statement implies A's presence is crucial for invincibility, suggesting A is a very valuable player. However, it doesn't compare A's talent directly to every other individual player on the team. The team's invincibility could be due to A plus the combined talent of other strong players. We cannot definitively say A is superior to *everyone* else based solely on this statement.
Result: Conclusion II does not follow.
Since neither Conclusion I nor Conclusion II logically follows from the given statement with reasonable certainty, the correct option is that neither conclusion follows.
Read the given statement and conclusions carefully and decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statement.
Statement:
The book 'P' emphasizes only on population of India and its related problems during 2001-2015.
Conclusions:
I. Increasing population is the biggest problem in India.
II. The book is the only book which deals with the problem of population in India.
Read the given statement and conclusions carefully and decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statement.
Statement:
The patient who was brought to the emergency during the last night would have survived if the surgery was done sometime before.
Conclusions:
I. Surgery was the only option for survival.
II. Patient was brought to the hospital late.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
All cats are bills.
No snakes are bills.
All snakes are dolls.
Conclusions:
(I) Some dolls are not cats.
(II) No bills are dolls.