UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A and B capture that validity is about form, not actual truth of premises. Statement C correctly defines the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Statement E is true because many reasoning questions test the distinction between validity and soundness. Statement D is false since a sound argument is valid and has true premises. Hence A, B, C and E only are correct.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E (importance of the distinction) even though A, B, C are true.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it omits B (valid with false premises) and also does not include all correct statements together.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it gathers all true statements and excludes D, which reverses the condition for soundness.

Option D:
Option D is wrong because it includes D (false), even though it contains some true statements.

Statements D and E are wrong, while A, B, C and F are correct. A and B correctly describe the truth conditions for conjunction and inclusive disjunction, and C accurately symbolises the exclusive “either–or”. F is true because truth tables are standard tools for checking validity. D mistakenly describes a tautology instead of a contradiction, and E wrongly describes the condition for a contingent statement rather than a tautology, so these two are the wrong statements.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it singles out only D as wrong and ignores E, which also misrepresents the definition of a tautology. Since both D and E give inverted definitions, treating only one of them as wrong undercounts the errors. Therefore this option does not match the full set of wrong statements.

Option B:
Option B is also incomplete, as it selects only E and ignores D. D is clearly false because a contradiction is never true in any assignment, not always true. By failing to include D, this option again fails to capture all wrong statements listed.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it groups exactly D and E, the two statements that invert the standard meanings of contradiction and tautology. It leaves A, B, C and F untouched, all of which correctly describe truth-functional connectives and the use of truth tables. This combination therefore matches the required set of wrong statements.

Option D:
Option D is wrong because it adds B, which is a correct description of inclusive disjunction, to the set of wrong statements. B rightly states that “p or q” is false only when both p and q are false. Including B beside the genuinely wrong D and E makes the option logically inconsistent.

Statements A and B are valid argument forms (modus ponens and modus tollens). C and D are invalid forms (affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent). Statement E is also correct: validity depends on logical form, not on whether the premises are factually true. Hence the correct set of statements is A, B and E only.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it leaves out B (modus tollens), which is also valid, and it also ignores E, which is a true statement about validity.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it includes A and B but omits E, even though E correctly states that validity depends on form rather than the truth of premises.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it includes C, and affirming the consequent is a standard fallacy; q can be true for reasons other than p.

Option D:
Option D is correct because it includes the two valid forms (A and B) and the correct general fact about validity (E), while excluding the two fallacies (C and D).

Statements A, B, C and E correctly explain how truth tables are used to test validity, while D and F are false. Validity is checked by looking for a counterexample row with true premises and false conclusion, and the absence of such a row shows validity. The number of rows indeed increases exponentially with the number of distinct simple propositions. D is wrong because truth tables work for any finite number of premises, and F is unrealistic about exam expectations, where simpler reasoning is usually sufficient.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E, failing to mention the key fact that truth table size grows rapidly with the number of propositions. While A, B and C correctly describe the validity test, they do not fully address the structure of truth tables. Hence this option does not contain all the correct statements.

Option B:
Option B is correct since it brings together the procedural rules for testing validity and the structural observation about row growth, without adding the unrealistic or incorrect claims of D and F. It captures both conceptual understanding and practical awareness. Therefore this option is consistent with how truth tables are taught for UGC NET.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it includes F, implying that students must always construct very large tables during the exam, which is not expected at Paper 1 level. It also omits C’s explicit statement of the condition for validity. This combination therefore misrepresents both difficulty and method.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect as it includes F and omits A, losing the basic explanation of how truth tables identify invalidity. With F present, it misleads students about exam requirements, and the absence of A leaves out the essential test for counterexamples. Thus B, C, E and F only cannot be the right answer.

Statements A and B correctly identify modus ponens and modus tollens as valid argument forms, and D correctly states that denying the antecedent is invalid even though it superficially resembles a valid pattern. Statement E is also true because exam questions often depend on distinguishing valid inferences from fallacies. Statement C is false since affirming the consequent is a classic fallacy; from “if p then q” and “q” one cannot conclude “p” with certainty. Therefore, the combination A, B, D and E only is correct.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E and therefore does not highlight the practical importance of recognising these forms when evaluating arguments in tests like UGC NET. Without E, the applied dimension of the topic is not fully expressed.

Option B:
Option B is also incomplete as it leaves out A, failing to mention explicitly the widely used valid pattern of modus ponens, which is central to many logical derivations. This omission weakens the conceptual coverage.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it includes C, which treats affirming the consequent as valid, and thereby endorses a logical fallacy. Even though A, B and D are true, the presence of C invalidates the combination.

Option D:
Option D is correct as it gathers the two standard valid forms, identifies denying the antecedent as invalid and notes the value of recognising these patterns in reasoning tasks, while excluding C, the misclassification of affirming the consequent. It matches the logic syllabus for UGC NET.