1. Statements : All streets are paths. Some streets are roads. All roads are trails. Conclusions: I. All trails being paths is a possibility. II. Atleast some paths are roads.






Write Comment

Type in
(Press Ctrl+g to toggle between English and the chosen language)

Comments

Tags
Show Similar Question And Answers
QA->In a Program Graph, ‘X’ is an if-then-else node. If the number of paths from start node to X is ‘p’ number of paths from if part to end node is ‘q’ and from else part to end node is ’r’, the total number of possible paths through X is :....
QA->…………….means the annual financial statements and other statements prescribed under Rule 65 of Kerala Panchayat Raj (Accounts) Rules, 2011?....
QA->Whichstate on 2 October 2016 notified Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 that saysthat drinkers could land drinkers in jail for up to 7 years with a fine of atleast 1 lakh rupees?....
QA->Statements of affairs method is called or known as _____ method.....
QA->Consider a Program Graph (PG) with statements as nodes and control as edges. Which of the following is not true for any PG?....
MCQ->Statements : All streets are paths. Some streets are roads. All roads are trails. Conclusions: I. All trails being paths is a possibility. II. Atleast some paths are roads.....
MCQ->Statements : Some lanes are streets. No street is a path. All roads are paths. Conclusions: I. Atleast some lanes are paths. II. Atleast some roads are streets.....
MCQ-> Read the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questionsThere is an essential and irreducible ‘duality’ in the normative conceptualization of an individual person. We can see the person in terms of his or her ‘agency’, recognizing and respecting his or her ability to form goals, commitments, values, etc., and we can also see the person in terms of his or her ‘well-being’. This dichotomy is lost in a model of exclusively self- interested motivation, in which a person’s agency must be entirely geared to his or her own well-being. But once that straitjacket of self-interested motivation is removed, it becomes possible to recognize the indisputable fact that the person’s agency can well be geared to considerations not covered - or at least not fully covered - by his or her own well-being. Agency may be seen as important (not just instrumentally for the pursuit of well-being, but also intrinsically), but that still leaves open the question as to how that agency is to be evaluated and appraised. Even though the use of one’s agency is a matter for oneself to judge, the need for careful assessment of aims, objective, allegiances, etc., and the conception of the good, may be important and exacting. To recognize the distinction between the ‘agency aspect’ and the ‘well-being aspect’ of a person does not require us to take the view that the person’s success as an agent must be independent, or completely separable from, his or her success in terms of well-being. A person may well feel happier and better off as a result of achieving what he or she wanted to achieve - perhaps for his or her family, or community, or class, or party, or some other cause. Also it is quite possible that a person’s well-being will go down as a result of frustration if there is some failure to achieve what he or she wanted to achieve as an agent, even though those achievements are not directly concerned with his or her well-being. There is really no sound basis for demanding that the agency aspect and the well-being aspect of a person should be independent of each other, and it is, I suppose, even possible that every change in one will affect the other as well. However, the point at issue is not the plausibility of their independence, but the sustainability and relevance of the distinction. The fact that two variables may be so related that one cannot change without the other, does not imply that they are the same variable, or that they will have the same values, or that the value of one can be obtained from the other on basis of some simple transformation. The importance of an agency achievement does not rest entirely on the enhancement of well-being that it may indirectly cause. The agency achievement and well-being achievement, both of which have some distinct importance, may be casually linked with each other, but this fact does not compromise the specific importance of either. In so far as utility - based welfare calculations concentrate only on the well- being of the person, ignoring the agency aspect, or actually fails to distinguish between the agency aspect and well-being aspect altogether, something of real importance is lost.According to the ideas in the passage, the following are not true expect:
 ....
MCQ-> In each questions below are two/three statements followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the two/three given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts and then decide which one of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Statements: All rings are circles. All squares are rings. No ellipse is a circle. Conclusions: I. Some rings being ellipses is a possibility II. Atleast some circles are squares.....
MCQ->Statements : Some trees are jungles. Some jungles are flowers. All flowers are streets. Conclusions: I. Some streets are jungles. II. Some streets are trees. III. Some flowers are trees.....
Terms And Service:We do not guarantee the accuracy of available data ..We Provide Information On Public Data.. Please consult an expert before using this data for commercial or personal use
DMCA.com Protection Status Powered By:Omega Web Solutions
© 2002-2017 Omega Education PVT LTD...Privacy | Terms And Conditions