Dhanu, Fani, Ganu and Tinu were playing cricket. One of them threw the ball on window by mistake and glass was broken. They all know who has done this and each one makes a statement about this. Select the person who has done the mistake if only one of them is making true statement. Dhanu : I didn't make the mistake and Ganu also didn't break it. Fani : I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it. Ganu : I didn't make the mistake and Fani also didn't break it. Tinu : I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it.

Dhanu, Fani, Ganu and Tinu were playing cricket. One of them threw the ball on window by mistake and glass was broken. They all know who has done this and each one makes a statement about this. Select the person who has done the mistake if only one of them is making true statement. Dhanu : I didn't make the mistake and Ganu also didn't break it. Fani : I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it. Ganu : I didn't make the mistake and Fani also didn't break it. Tinu : I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it. Correct Answer Tinu

The logic follows here is:

Dhanu: I didn't make the mistake and Ganu also didn't break it.

Fani: I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it.

Ganu: I didn't make the mistake and Fani also didn't break it.

Tinu: I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it.

Here, everyone is talking about himself and one of their friend.

If we notice, no one says that Tinu didn't break it except for himself.

Tinu says: I didn't make the mistake and Dhanu also didn't break it

This means, that what Dhanu is saying is True and that Dhanu and Ganu didn't break it.

Therefore, all their friends know that Tinu make a mistake and that's why no one is defending Tinu.

Hence, the correct answer is "Tinu".

Related Questions

Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives. By practicing mindfulness and other principles, we become more aware of and present to our fears and others fears, bearing witness as a way of healing andempowering. We see the spiritual path as intertwined with the path of social action, with contemplation and action parts of the same whole, each nourishing andguiding the other. Acknowledging that our well-being depends on others makes caring for others well-being a moral responsibility.
Through a “mindful citizen” exercise, we create a story articulating who we are as individuals who are also part of communities. This exercise helps us move beyond cynicism, complacency, and despair, instead infusing us with a sense of purpose. We embrace our gifts, resolving to do our part to promote a sense of common humanity as a means toward social justice.
With this exercise, I believe we can help students bridge their divides and replace anger and distrust with compassionate connections – just as I witnessed betweenShirley and Tiffany.
Shirley returned to class after a brief hiatus, keeping a cool distance from Tiffany. But over the weeks spent together they gradually came to know each other. They practiced seeing and listening, sharing stories so different that they felt bewildered as to how they could overcome the gap. But they found that acknowledging their
differences led them to discover a place of deep connection in commonalities, such as being raised by grandmothers, and even wounds, including childhood trauma,that they never imagined existed.
In assessments of these classes, students say that these small groups become “healing communities,” where we overcome victimization and claim agency. Healingoccurs as we transcend an “us vs. them” mentality, crossing borders and forging connections. These communities show a way of reducing intergroup prejudice andfostering inclusion based in psychology research and pedagogical practice. What makes the others well-being a moral responsibility for us?
Principle: If an injury is the result of a reasonably foreseeable cause, the person/authority responsible is liable for damages because he has a duty to take reasonable measures to prevent it.
Facts: Janet, a housewife standing at her balcony, was struck on the head by a ball that flew out of a cricket field across her home. Janet sues the District Cricket Association (DCA), the owner of the cricket field for public nuisance and negligence on the ground that the field did not have a fence high enough to prevent such occurrence. District Cricket Association (DCA) claims that only about 10 balls had escaped the field in the previous 10 years and it was therefore an unforeseeable risk. Is there a duty on the part of the District Cricket Association (DCA) to prevent the risk? Is the District Cricket Association (DCA) liable to compensate Janet?