📖 Tier 1: Prepare & Study Guide ✓ 100% Solved with Rationales

Analysis (Logic) Solved Questions & Notes (2026) - Apex Rankers

General Competitive Exams > Logic > Analysis

4 Total Questions
~6 mins Read Time
1 Subject Areas
🎯 Launch Practice Mode
Q. 1 Intelligence Tests
Difficulty: Hard (1 Mark)
If is immoral to blame people for what they do... The author undercuts his own argument by:
A
Adopting dubious psychological theories
✓ Correct
B
Undermining morality
C
Attacking human freedom
D
Arguing emotionally
E
Doing what he argues against
💡 Step-by-Step Explanation & Concept Rationale
The argument relies on the premise of behavioral conditioning, which is a specific psychological framework.
Q. 2 Intelligence Tests
Difficulty: Hard (1 Mark)
A line cannot be divided everywhere; therefore, it can't be divided anywhere. Which parallels this fallacious reasoning?
A
Nobody likes anybody; therefore, everybody likes nobody.
✓ Correct
B
Asif can do every problem in this book; so Asif can do all of the problems in this book.
C
There are some problems Asif can't do; therefore there are no problems Asif can't do.
D
Any time he's at bat, Bill can hit a homer; so Bill can hit nothing but homers.
E
No number can be divided by every number; therefore, some number can be divided by no number.
💡 Step-by-Step Explanation & Concept Rationale
This follows the same "composition" fallacy where a trait of a part/instance is incorrectly applied to the whole.
📜 Instructions / Reading Passage
1 Question in this set
Argument Analysis: Many more people who smoke develop lung cancer than do those who do not smoke. In the face of this evidence, how could a cigarette company representative argue against the conclusion the cigarette smoking causes lung cancer?
Q. 3 Intelligence Tests
Difficulty: Hard (1 Mark)
How could a cigarette company representative argue against the conclusion?
A
Many things might cause cancer
B
Single cause may be responsible...
✓ Correct
C
People have right to endanger themselves
D
People will smoke anyhow
💡 Step-by-Step Explanation & Concept Rationale
This targets the causal link by suggesting a confounding third variable.
📜 Instructions / Reading Passage
1 Question in this set
It's true that Bobby Riggs was not in top form when he was defeated in straight sets by Billie Jean King. It's also true, however, that Riggs was in top form when he defeated Margaret Court in straight sets just a few months earlier. And yet, Court defeated King each of the three times they played that year. King's victory over Riggs can't be attributed to luck since she played remarkably well. Therefore, it's clear that women tennis players can match or surpass top male players in skill.
Q. 4 Intelligence Tests
Difficulty: Hard (1 Mark)
The main problem with this argument is:
A
Biased toward feminism
B
Assumes Margaret Court best
C
Confuses people with playing styles
✓ Correct
D
Assumes women equal to men
💡 Step-by-Step Explanation & Concept Rationale
The argument relies on a false equivalence between individual traits and gender norms.
Study Stream Progress: Showing 4 of 4 Questions (100%)
🎉 All 4 Solved Questions in Analysis Loaded!

You have studied the complete question pool with step-by-step rationales. Ready to test yourself?

Ready to Test Your Retention & Speed?

Now that you have reviewed the study questions and rationales, test yourself in our interactive 1-by-1 practice engine or take the full official timed mock exam.