Read the statements and identify the logically correct conclusion from the given information. Statement: “The pedestrian crossing is few feet away. It is safe to use it, “says a mother to her child. Conclusions: I. Pedestrian should use pedestrian crossing for safety.
Only conclusion I follows
Analyzing the Logical Reasoning Statement and Conclusions
The question asks us to evaluate a given statement and determine which of the provided conclusions logically follows from it. This involves careful reading and analysis of the information presented in the statement.
Breaking Down the Statement
The statement is: “The pedestrian crossing is few feet away. It is safe to use it, “says a mother to her child.
Let's identify the key pieces of information in this statement:
- There is a pedestrian crossing nearby ("few feet away").
- Using this pedestrian crossing is safe ("It is safe to use it").
- The speaker is a mother talking to her child.
The core message is about the safety associated with using the pedestrian crossing.
Evaluating Conclusion I: Pedestrian Safety and Crossing
Conclusion I states: Pedestrian should use pedestrian crossing for safety.
Let's compare this with the statement. The mother explicitly says that using the pedestrian crossing is "safe". This implies that the pedestrian crossing provides safety, and therefore, pedestrians should use it for safety. This conclusion is a direct inference based on the safety attribute mentioned in the statement regarding the pedestrian crossing.
Conclusion I logically follows from the statement.
Evaluating Conclusion II: Knowledge of Pedestrian Crossing by Children
Conclusion II states: All the children know what is pedestrian crossing.
The statement involves a mother talking to *her* child. It gives us no information about whether *all* children universally know what a pedestrian crossing is. The mother might be reminding her child, assuming her child knows, or even explaining it. The statement provides no basis to conclude anything about the knowledge level of all children regarding pedestrian crossings.
Conclusion II does not logically follow from the statement.
Identifying the Logically Correct Conclusion
Based on the analysis:
- Conclusion I is a logical deduction from the statement that using the pedestrian crossing is safe.
- Conclusion II makes a broad generalization about all children's knowledge, which is not supported by the specific statement about one mother and her child.
Therefore, only conclusion I logically follows from the given information.
Summary of Conclusions Analysis
| Conclusion | Analysis | Logically Follows? |
|---|---|---|
| I. Pedestrian should use pedestrian crossing for safety. | Statement says using the crossing is safe. Implies using it provides safety. | Yes |
| II. All the children know what is pedestrian crossing. | Statement is about one mother and child. Provides no information about all children's knowledge. | No |
The statement provides a specific reason (safety) for using the pedestrian crossing, which directly supports Conclusion I. Conclusion II introduces information about 'all children's knowledge', which is outside the scope and implication of the original statement.
Revision Table: Logical Reasoning and Conclusions
| Concept | Description | Importance in Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Statement | A declarative sentence that is either true or false. | The premise from which conclusions are drawn. |
| Conclusion | A judgment or decision reached by reasoning. | Must be logically supported by the statement(s). |
| Logical Inference | Deriving a conclusion from given premises. | Ensures the conclusion is valid based on the information provided. |
| Assumption | Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof. | Should be avoided when drawing logical conclusions unless explicitly stated or implied. |
Additional Information: Understanding Logical Deduction
Logical deduction is a fundamental concept in reasoning. It is the process of starting with a general statement or premise and arriving at a specific conclusion. In the context of this problem, the statement acts as the premise.
A conclusion logically follows a statement if the truth of the statement guarantees the truth of the conclusion. If it is possible for the statement to be true and the conclusion to be false, then the conclusion does not logically follow.
- In this case, if "using the pedestrian crossing is safe" is true (as stated), it strongly supports the idea that it should be used for safety. Conclusion I is consistent with and supported by the statement's assertion of safety.
- However, the statement provides no information about whether children, in general, are aware of what a pedestrian crossing is. The truth of the statement (mother telling her child it's safe to use the crossing) does not prevent Conclusion II (all children know what a pedestrian crossing is) from being false. Therefore, Conclusion II cannot be logically deduced from the statement.
This exercise highlights the importance of sticking strictly to the information provided in the statement when drawing logical conclusions and avoiding bringing in outside knowledge or making unsupported generalizations.
Important Questions from Statements and Conclusions
A situation is given, followed by two conclusions I and II. Read the situation and both the conclusions carefully and select the correct answer.
Situation:
Since the past 15 years, 75% of the products in the world’s pottery market comes from Country K. However, the employment in the pottery industry of Country K has been consistently declining by 5-9% every year since the past 3 years.
Conclusions:
I. Even after declining employment, Country K has enough potters to continue contributing equally to the international market.
II. The local demand of pottery in Country K has substantially decreased leading to less interest among potters.
The statement below is followed by three conclusions labelled I, II and III. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the three suggested conclusions logically follows for pursuing.
Statements:
1) No school is an institution but they are establishment.
2) All establishments that are not institutions have buildings.
Conclusions:
I. Schools are not establishments.
II. All schools have buildings.
III. Schools do not have buildings.Read the given statements and conclusion carefully and decide which of the following options is true with respect to the given conclusion.
Statements:
The Gateway of India is in Mumbai.
Mumbai is in India.
Conclusion:
The Gateway of India is in India.
Read the given statements and conclusion carefully and decide which of the following options is true with respect to the given conclusion.
Statements:
Men who are handsome are generally of the intellectual type.
Vikram is handsome.
Conclusion:
Vikram is intellectual.Given is a statement, followed by four conclusions. Read the statement carefully and decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the given statement.
Statement:
This book can help because all good books help.
Conclusions:
I. This is not a good book.
II. This is a good book.
III. No good book helps.
IV. Some good books help.
