Question

When you look at the people who make fundamental, revolutionary breakthrough in any field, you keep noticing over and over again a high preponderance of them have some sort of disability when they were younger, whether it was a physical disability or mental disability, which leads to lower expectations from others, whom they always wanted to prove wrong (1). And what does it do (2)? What does that do to you, when you try to prove someone wrong (3)? You increase your engagement in something because you want to fight against those expectations (4). So it seems like it actually can be a gift having what we label as a disability, or disorder, and cause people to overcompensate and engage in things in other ways (5). A research study shows that higher number of people with dyslexia become social entrepreneurs because they over-compensate their disability through nonverbal communication, initiative and gift (6). And this overcompensation leads to greatness (7). The best match would be:

• A. 1-Assumption, 2-Question, 3-Reason, 4-Fact
• B. 1-Assumption, 2-Question, 4-Reason, 7-Conclusion
• C. 1-Fact, 2-Question, 4-Reason, 6-Reason
• D. 1-Fact, 3-Question, 4-Reason, 7-Inductive Inference
• E. 3-Question, 4-Reason, 5-Fact, 6-Proposition
• A. 1-Fact, 2-Reason, 3-Deductive Inference
• B. 1-Reason, 2-Reason, 3-Inductive Inference
• C. 1-Inductive Inference, 2-Fact, 3-Inductive Inference
• D. 1-Inductive Inference, 2-Inductive Inference, 3-Inductive Inference
• J. 1-Reason, 2-Reason, 3- Reason

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Analyze (1).
“High preponderance of them have some sort of disability...” — this is not a verifiable fact presented with data, rather a generalized claim accepted for argument. Hence, it is an Assumption.
Step 2: Analyze (2).
“And what does it do?” — clearly a Question, seeking explanation.
Step 3: Analyze (4).
“You increase your engagement in something because you want to fight against those expectations.” — this is giving a cause-effect justification, hence a Reason.
Step 4: Analyze (7).
“And this overcompensation leads to greatness.” — this serves as the end or summarization of the entire argument, hence it is a Conclusion.
\[ \boxed{\text{1-Assumption, 2-Question, 4-Reason, 7-Conclusion}} \]

Answer 2

Step 1: Recall definition.
Inductive inference = a conclusion about the general case (the whole) drawn from a specific incident (a particular).
Step 2: Classify (1).
From one tragedy in Saran district A particular) the author infers “chronic neglect of school education in a large part of India” A generalization) ⇒ Inductive inference.
Step 3: Classify (2).
Observations about inability to find land / safely store food are used to comment on “their commitment to universal primary education” (moving from specifics to a general evaluation) ⇒ Inductive inference.
Step 4: Classify (3).
“The Bihar horror clearly points to the absence of strong normative procedures …” Again, from one horror event to a broad systemic conclusion ⇒ Inductive inference.
\[ \boxed{\text{(1) Inductive, (2) Inductive, (3) Inductive}} \]