Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Drawing Deductive Conclusions 4

Question 1

Premise: No city in Region A has a population under 50,000. Premise: Millbrook is a city in Region A. Conclusion: Millbrook has a population of at least 50,000. Is this conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion follows — the universal negative leaves no exceptions for Region A cities.

Answer

Because no city in Region A has a population under 50,000 and Millbrook is a city in Region A, Millbrook must have at least 50,000 people.

Question 2

Premise: All board members who attended the summit signed the agreement. Premise: Director Chen did not sign the agreement. Conclusion: Director Chen did not attend the summit. Is this conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion follows — not signing is proof of non-attendance given the premise.

Answer

Since attending the summit guarantees signing, the absence of a signature (contrapositive) guarantees non-attendance.

Question 3

Premise: Either the server is overloaded or the network is down. Premise: The server is not overloaded. Conclusion: The network is down. Is this conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion follows — eliminating one disjunct in an either/or statement forces the other.

Answer

An 'either/or' premise guarantees at least one is true; ruling out the server being overloaded means the network must be down.

Question 4

Premise: All registered voters in Precinct 7 received a ballot. Premise: Ms. Rivera received a ballot. Conclusion: Ms. Rivera is a registered voter in Precinct 7. Is this conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion does not follow — ballots may have been distributed to other groups as well.

Answer

The premise says registered voters received ballots, not that receiving a ballot is exclusive to registered voters in Precinct 7; others may have also received ballots.

Question 5

Premise: Every product recalled by the agency contained defective components. Premise: Product X was recalled by the agency. Conclusion: Product X contained defective components. Is this conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion follows — the universal rule covers every recalled product, including Product X.

Answer

Since every recalled product contained defective components and Product X was recalled, it necessarily follows that Product X contained defective components.

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Practice Test

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Practice Test

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Drawing Deductive Conclusions 4