Logical Reasoning MCQ Set 24

Question 1: In case Sue sits between Pete and Harry, then Harry sits between Sue and Mike. Harry won't be there unless Sue sits next to Mike. Hence, Sue will not sit between Pete and Harry.
Apart from the above mentioned statements, what additional premises are assumed by the author of this argument?
Mike sits next to Sue if no one sits between them.
If Sue sits between Pete and Harry, then Sue sits between Harry and Pete.
If Harry isn't there, then he doesn't sit next to Mike.

1. I and II only
2. I and III only
3. II and III only
4. I, II and III
5. None of the above

Question 1: Authorities concerned with mass transport in metropolitan cities are struggling with deficits. Commuters complain about delays and breakdowns, cuts in service, and fares higher than they are accustomed to paying. For all these reasons and because the price of fuel is still not prohibitive, the number of commuters using public transportation has fallen, adding to the deficits.
Which among the following statements about the relationship between the number of commuters using public transportation and the price of fuel is best supported by the above passage?

1. With the rise in the price of fuel, there is a rise in the number of commuters using public transportation.
2. Even if the price of fuel rises, the number of commuters using public transportation will continue to decline.
3. The number of commuters using public transportation will rise, if the price of fuel rises to a prohibitive level.
4. Most of the commuters using public transportation do not use fuel, therefore fluctuations in the price of fuel is unlikely to affect the number of commuters using public transportation.
5. The price of fuel is always low enough to make private transportation cheaper than public transportation; therefore fluctuations in the price of fuel is unlikely to affect the number of commuters using public transportation.

Question 1: Pharmaceutical firms are now engaged in the production of analogues of endorphins, peptides, which are thought to transmit messages among brain cells, which bring about pain relief. The pharmaceutical firms claim that the analogues, when injected into the bloodstream, will lead to effective and long-lasting pain relief by increasing the action of peptides already present in the brain.
The claims put forth by the pharmaceutical firms would be considerably weakened if it were true that

1. Compared to the other types of neurotransmitters present in the brain, endorphins remain active for a longer time period.
2. Certain peptides have been traced in parts besides the brain, like the alimentary canal and the skin.
3. It is easier and cheaper to produce analogues of peptides in the laboratory than the peptides themselves.
4. Analogues of peptides, which are found naturally in the body are often filtered from the blood before the blood circulates in the brain.
5. Endorphins interact chemically both with other naturally occurring peptides and with the brain's other neurotransmitters.

Question 1: It is popularly believed that teachers are more or less indifferent about the microcomputer technology. This assumption is false, or at least dated. A survey recently conducted indicated that 80 percent of the 7,000 surveyed teachers revealed a high level of interest in microcomputers.
Among the following statements which would most damage the above argument if proved to be true?

1. There was no attempt made in the survey to ascertain whether the surveyed teachers had any previous exposure to microcomputers.
2. Teachers interested in microcomputer technology were more likely to complete and return the questionnaires than others.
3. Irrespective of their subject area, their expertise and their teaching experience questionnaires were received by the teachers.
4. After the survey results were tabulated there have been many developments in the applications of microcomputer technology.
5. A company manufacturing and selling microcomputers conducted the survey.

Question 1: Which among the following statements is the most probable taking into consideration the source and the degree of seriousness with which they are uttered?

1. Examiner: "The exam will be taken under the honor system: the professors have the honor, and the students have the system."
2. Banker: "The low percentage of Jews in this bank has nothing to do with discrimination. Jews don't seem to be interested in banking."
3. Book cover: "This book is sure to become the last word in its field."
4. Politician: "My opponent has an impeccable political and personal record."
5. Artist: "Einstein's theory of relativity falsifies life."

Question 1: Tom: It is likely that Greece will be humiliated in the Cyprus affair. In case she fights Turkey, she will be defeated in battle; whereas if she doesn't fight, letting Turkey win, she will be humiliated, as she would then seem impotent.
Sarah: In that case Greece could always call the Soviet Union to her aid.
Sarah attacks Tom's argument by:

1. attacking Tom on a personal level.
2. attacking Tom's method of reasoning
3. siding with Greece
4. advocating passive resistance
5. citing an alternative which was overlooked by Tom.