Question:
The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising of legal services, the more lawyers there are who advertise their services, and the lawyers who advertise a specific service usually charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. Therefore if the state removes any of its current restrictions, such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements, overall consumer legal costs will be lower than if the state retains its current restrictions. If the statements above are true, which of the following must be true?
The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising of legal services, the more lawyers there are who advertise their services, and the lawyers who advertise a specific service usually charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. Therefore if the state removes any of its current restrictions, such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements, overall consumer legal costs will be lower than if the state retains its current restrictions. If the statements above are true, which of the following must be true?
Updated On: Aug 19, 2025
- Some lawyers who now advertise will charge more for specific services if they do not have to specify fee arrangements in the advertisements.
- More consumers will use legal services if there are fewer restrictions on the advertising of legal services.
- If the restrictions against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements is removed, more lawyers will advertise their services.
- If more lawyers advertise lower prices for specific services, some lawyers who do not advertise will also charge less than they currently charge for those services.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
To analyze the given logical reasoning task, it's crucial to break down the statements and link them to the conclusion. Let's dive into the solution.
Analysis of Premises:
- Premise 1: Fewer restrictions lead to more lawyers advertising their services.
- Premise 2: Lawyers who advertise specific services generally charge less for these services than those who do not advertise.
- Conclusion: If restrictions are removed, consumer legal costs will decrease.
Steps to Determine the Correct Option:
- Identify the link between premises: Removing restrictions leads to more advertisement, which in turn leads to lower charges for specific services by advertising lawyers.
- Understand the role of advertising: Since lawyers who advertise charge less, more advertising results in lower overall costs.
- Analyze options to see which logically follows: The correct statement should directly follow from the removal of restrictions leading to more advertising.
Conclusion: Among the options, the statement "If the restrictions against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements is removed, more lawyers will advertise their services" aligns perfectly with the logical progression presented in the premises. Therefore, this statement must be true as it directly connects fewer restrictions to increased advertising.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Syllogisms
- If all roses are flowers and some flowers are red, which statement must be true?
- Statements:
(I) All Forces are energies
(II) All energies are powers
(III) No power is heat
Conclusions:
(I) Some forces are definitely not powers
(II) No heat is force - In the question below are given three statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II, and III. You have to take the given statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follow/s from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts. Statements:
- Some mountains are hillocks.
- Some mountains are rivers.
- Some mountains are valleys.
Conclusions:
I. All mountains are either hillocks or rivers or valleys.
II. No valley is river.
III. Some rivers are valleys. - Three statements are followed by four conclusions I, II, III, and IV. Take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts and decide which of the given conclusions logically follow from the given statements. Statements:
1. All animals are vegetables.
2. All fishes are vegetables.
3. All birds are fishes.
Conclusions:
I. Some birds are animals.
II. Some vegetables are fishes.
III. Some vegetables are animals.
IV. All birds are vegetables. - If no scholars are athletes, and some athletes are musicians, can we infer that no scholars are musicians?
View More Questions
Questions Asked in SNAP exam
Consider the following alphanumeric series with powers:
A1, C3, E5, G7, __, __, I9, __,K11, M13, __
Based on the observed pattern, complete the series by selecting the correct options:
- SNAP - 2023
- Sequence and Series
Consider the following information:
Set A: Animals that can fly
Set B: Birds
Set C: Animals that live in water
Using Venn diagrams, represent the relationships between these sets and answer the question. Which region(s) in the Venn diagram represents animals that can fly and also live in water?
- SNAP - 2023
- Venn Diagrams
Arrange the following words in lexicographical (dictionary) order from highest to lowest:
1. Elephant
2. Banana
3. Apple
4. Cherry
- SNAP - 2023
- Venn Diagrams
A trader marked up shirts by 40%, offered a 20% discount during a sale, and sold each for 234. Find the number of shirts he purchased.
- SNAP - 2023
- Profit and Loss
In a collection of coins, the ratio of the number of 2-rupee coins to 5-rupee coins to 1-rupee coins is \(3 : 4 : 5\). If the total value of these coins is Rs. 18.75, how much money is represented by the 5-rupee coins?
- SNAP - 2023
- Ratio and Proportion
View More Questions