Question

Instructions (133 to 135): Select the statement which logically follows the two given statements.

Statements:
I All persons who have done any creative work can be responsible critics
II Z has not done any creative work
III Therefore --------------------------

• A. Z can be a responsible critic
• B. Z cannot be a responsible critic
• C. Z can become a responsible critic
• D. Z cannot become a responsible critic

Hint:

Treat creative work as the entry ticket, then check whether Z holds one. Also watch the verb: the premise says "can be", so the conclusion should too.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Two things have to be sorted out here. First, which direction the argument runs. Second, the difference between the verbs "be" and "become", because the options split on exactly that.

1. Z can be a responsible critic: This ignores the second statement entirely. If having done creative work is the qualification on offer, then Z, who has none, has nothing supporting this claim. The option is what the question is testing you to reject.
2. Z cannot be a responsible critic: Read statement I as setting the entry condition for the responsible critic group. Z fails the entry condition, so Z stays outside the group. The verb matches the premise, which says "can be responsible critics", so the conclusion is phrased in the same terms as the data. This is the option the setter wants.
3. Z can become a responsible critic: The word "become" opens up the future, and the premises say nothing about Z's future creative output. It also carries the wrong direction, since Z's current lack of creative work argues against him rather than for him.
4. Z cannot become a responsible critic: The direction is right but the reach is too long. Nothing stops Z from doing creative work tomorrow and qualifying then. Ruling out becoming, forever, is more than the two statements support.

Worth flagging honestly: strict logic does not license option (B) either. Statement I says people with creative work can be responsible critics, but it never says they are the only ones. Concluding that Z is barred is the move called denying the antecedent, and it is formally invalid. The question expects the everyday reading, where creative work is treated as the necessary qualification, and on that reading option (B) is the answer.

Let's summarize:

• Z lacks the one qualification the first statement mentions.
• The conclusion must keep the premise's verb, "be", not switch to "become".
• Options talking about becoming reach into a future the premises never describe.

The intended answer is option (B).