Deductive Logic: Test-1

Deductive Logic in general means to reach a certain logical conclusion from a general statement. The conclusion is usually derived from the stated premises. Solving such problem needs use of correct reasoning to determine a logical conclusion. The ability to logically examine the premises and determine the certain idea from a general statement helps build your reasoning abilities.
The process of solving the problem involves taking various assumptions depending on the plot of the situation. You may even think of solving such a problem thinking backwards. Even the use of tables and Venn diagrams can be sort to solve the problem. While the main objective of this test is to strengthen your knowledge and reasoning skill by solving some logical problems.
Make sure you have gone through the topic concepts before starting this test.

Deductive Logic:Test-1

Please wait while the activity loads.
If this activity does not load, try refreshing your browser. Also, this page requires javascript. Please visit using a browser with javascript enabled.

If loading fails, click here to try again

Congratulations - you have completed Deductive Logic:Test-1.

You scored %%SCORE%% out of %%TOTAL%%.

You correct answer percentage: %%PERCENTAGE%% .

Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%

Your answers are highlighted below.

Question 1

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment. B. Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health. C. Traffic congestion is hazardous to health. D. Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide. E. Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.

A	CBA
B	BDE
C	CDE
D	BAC

Question 1 Explanation:

Option 4 is the correct choice as it forms a valid syllogism. The premises state that the increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health and traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment. Hence, it can be interpreted that traffic congestion is hazardous to health.

Question 2

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Apples are not sweets. B. Some apples are sweet. C. All sweets are tasty. D. Some apples are not tasty. E. No apple is tasty.

A	CEA
B	BDC
C	CBD
D	EAC

Question 2 Explanation:

Solution: CEA is a valid choice as it forms a syllogism. Sweets are subset of tasty things. Apples are not tasty things. As apples are not part of the main set of tasty things, they can never be a subset of sweets.

Question 3

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Some towns in India are polluted. B. All polluted towns should be destroyed. C. Town Meghana should be destroyed. D. Town Meghana is polluted. E. Some towns in India should be destroyed.

A	BDE
B	BAE
C	ADE
D	CDB

Question 3 Explanation:

The answer choice is option B, BAE. The premises state that the polluted towns should be destroyed and that some towns in India are polluted. The 'some' in statement E refers to the polluted towns in India that should be destroyed.

Question 4

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. No patriot is a criminal. B. Bogusdas is not a criminal C. Bogusdas is a criminal. D. Bogusdas is not a patriot. E. Bogusdas is a criminal

A	ACB
B	ACD
C	ADE
D	ABE

Question 4 Explanation:

Solution: Option ACD is the right choice. Since, patriot and criminals are two distinct sets, someone who is a patriot cannot be a criminal. Therefore, if Bogusdas is a criminal, Bogusdas cannot be a patriot.

Question 5

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Ant eaters like ants. B. Boys are anteaters. C. Balaram is an anteater. D. Balaram likes ants. E. Balaram may eat ants

A	DCA
B	ADC
C	ABE
D	ACD

Question 5 Explanation:

Ant eaters like ants and Balaram is an ant eater. Therefore, Balaram likes ants.

Question 6

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. All actors are handsome B. Some actors are popular C. Ram is handsome D. Ram is a popular actor E. Some popular people are handsome

A	ACD
B	ABE
C	DCA
D	EDC

Question 6 Explanation:

ABE is the apt choice. All actors are handsome and some of these actors are also popular. Therefore, some who are popular are also handsome.

Question 7

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Modern industry is technology-driven B. BTI is a modern industry. C. BTI is technology-driven D. BTI may be technology-driven E. Technology driven industry is modern.

A	ABC
B	ABD
C	BCA
D	EBC

Question 7 Explanation:

Option 1 is the right choice as it forms a valid syllogism. All modern industries are technology driven. BTI is a modern industry. Hence, BTI is technology driven.

Question 8

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. All Golmal islanders are blue-coloured people. B. Some smart people are not blue-coloured people. C. Some babies are blue-coloured. D. Some babies are smart. E. Some smart people are not Golman islanders.

A	BCD
B	BEA
C	CBD
D	None of these

Question 8 Explanation:

Those smart people who are not blue-colored are definitely not Golmal islanders. Order ABE makes a valid syllogism. Hence, option 4 is the right choice.

Question 9

Directions for the question: The following question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.
A. MBAs are in great demand.
B. Ram and Sita are in great demand.
C. Ram and Sita are MBAs.
D. Sita is in great demand.
E. Ram and Sita are not MBAs.

A	ABE
B	ECD
C	ACB
D	EBA

Question 9 Explanation:

All MBAs are in great demand and Ram and Sita also belong to the set of MBAs. Hence, they are also in great demand. ACB is the correct sequence. Hence, option C is the right choice.

Question 10

Directions for the question: The following question consists of six statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. All bins are buckets. B. No bucket is a basket. C. No bin is a basket. D. Some baskets are buckets. E. Some bins are baskets. F. No basket is a bin.