this is also one of those problems where 'decoding' the statements by translating them into numbers works wonders: just sort through numbers by trial and error, and find the list of numbers that works for each statement.
(1)
the numbers that work for this statement are 3, 9, 15, 21, etc. adding 6 each time.
(2)
the numbers that work for this statement are 3, 15, 27, 39, etc. adding 12 each time.
if you make these lists - which hardly takes a prohibitive amount of time** - you'll find that either statement is sufficient on its own, so, (d).
incidentally, you should at least be able to translate '1 is the remainder upon dividing X by 2' into 'X is odd', IMMEDIATELY.
--
as i said
here,
if you have a problem about REMAINDERS, you should view that problem as an opportunity for PATTERN RECOGNITION.
there are lots of topics that lead to recognition of common patterns - i.e., remainders aren't the only topic of such problems - but,
in remainder problems, CLEAR patterns tend to emerge QUICKLY if you start testing numbers in some sort of systematic manner.
--
finally, i feel compelled to respond to the following:
visualizing for better understanding though during the test this is not worth the time in most cases:
kill that noise.
if you find a viable solution method, you should embark on it IMMEDIATELY, unless you KNOW it's going to take an absolutely ridiculous amount of time.
and you can rest assured that won't be the case here, because, as noted above, patterns on remainder problems tend to emerge early and often.
the last thing that you
ever want to do on this test is sit there, staring dumbfounded at a problem,
even though you have a potential solution method in mind. that will kill you.
if you think of a method involving plugging / listing, just start doing it. if it's going to be ridiculously time-consuming, you'll figure that out fast enough to abort it anyway - no harm done.
indecision is the WORST trait you can have on this test, bar none.