In this particular case, the author clarifies the response with the second sentence.
With respect, the author does not "clarify" the response with the 2nd sentence, the author contadicts it.
Here are the sentences:
"All Seniors at The Academy take calculus and physics.
Some seniors take both courses."
The phrase "Calculus and physics" is not equivalent to "calculus or physics".
The 2nd sentence here contradicts the 1st, and the reader does not have sufficient information inside the 4 corners of the "logical problem" to decide which sentence should prevail.
It is simply arbitrary to say the 2nd sentence should prevail over the 1st. Why not the 1st over the 2nd?
In this situation, the only logical thing to do is to answer "None of the above" and ask for more information to resolve the apparent contradiction.
Since there is no "None of the above" option, one should 'think outside the box' and provide the correct answer [literally outside the box] in writing.
Of course, this is a very good lesson for real life.
How many times do we assume something from incomplete or inconsistent input, and end up running off in the wrong direction, wasting time or money, our own or someone else's?
Getting the facts straight in the beginning is the real lesson to be learned from this particular "logic problem". That and having the courage and self-confidence to resist the stampede to the 'wrong' answer simply because it is the best of all the 'wrong' answers provided.
Congratulations to the authors of this problem!
[I just hope the computers which are programmed to tabulate test results will recognize the correct answer scribbled outside the box. Otherwise, we will be punishing, and, worse, extirpating the courage and creativity of our most gifted test-takers.]
