Parallel reasoning type.Stimulus's reasoning: If A occurs, B occurs. B occurred, A must have occurred.
Quote:
A. If we win the game, we will be the league champions.
If A happens, B happens. What next? Not completely parallel. Reject.
Quote:
B. If the fan is running, then electricity must be on. The electricity is on; therefore, the fan must be running.
If A occurs, B occurs. B has occurred, so A must have occurred. Quite similar to the stimulus's logic. Correct.
Quote:
C. If the store is open, I will buy a shirt. I think the store is open; therefore, I should be able to buy a shirt.
If A occurs, B occurs. A has occurred (maybe), so B may occur. Not parallel to the stimulus's logic. Incorrect.
Quote:
D. If Javed answers his phone, then my prediction is correct. I predict that he is at home; therefore, he will answer his phone.
If A occurs, B occurs. B is prediction. Whether the prediction is correct or not is not given in this choice. So, not parallel to our stimulus's logic. Incorrect.
Quote:
E. If Selim flight is delayed, he will miss his appointment. He kept his appointment; therefore, his flight must have been on time.
If A occurs, B occurs. B did not occur, so A did not occur. Not parallel to our reasoning given in the stimulus. Reject.
I was stuck between B and E for a while, but I chose E over B - just because the electricity is on, does not necessarily mean that the fan is running, whereas there isn't an analogous issue with the logic in E.