In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements. Statements: I. All A are M. II. No M is B. Conclusions: I. Some M are A. II. Some B are M. III. Some A are B.
Only conclusion I follows
This question tests our ability to draw logical conclusions based on given statements. This is a classic problem in logical reasoning, often solved using Venn diagrams or rules of syllogism. We must assume the given statements are true, even if they contradict real-world knowledge.
Let's break down the statements provided:
We can visualize these relationships using Venn diagrams:
Putting them together, the 'A' circle is inside the 'M' circle, and the 'M' circle has no connection to the 'B' circle. This implies the 'A' circle also has no connection to the 'B' circle.
Now, let's examine each conclusion based on the truth of the statements:
Statement I says "All A are M". If every single element of set A is also an element of set M, then it must logically follow that there are some elements in M that are also in A (at least all the elements that are in A). This conclusion is a direct and valid deduction from Statement I.
Evaluation: This conclusion follows.
Statement II says "No M is B". This establishes a complete separation between the set M and the set B. If no M is B, it means there is no overlap between M and B. The conclusion "Some B are M" claims that there is an overlap between B and M, which directly contradicts Statement II.
Evaluation: This conclusion does not follow.
From Statement I, we know "All A are M". From Statement II, we know "No M is B". Since all A are contained within M, and M has no relationship with B (specifically, no M is B), it means that nothing that is in M can be in B. As all A are in M, nothing that is in A can be in B. Therefore, "No A is B" is a valid conclusion. The conclusion "Some A are B" claims there is an overlap between A and B, which contradicts the derived conclusion "No A is B".
Evaluation: This conclusion does not follow.
Based on our analysis:
Therefore, only Conclusion I is a valid deduction from the given statements.
| Conclusion | Logical Deduction? | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Some M are A | Yes | If All A are M, then Some M must be A. |
| Some B are M | No | Statement says No M is B, meaning no overlap. |
| Some A are B | No | Since All A are M and No M is B, then No A is B. |
Only conclusion I follows from the given statements.
| Term | Definition | Relationship Example |
|---|---|---|
| Syllogism | A form of logical argument where a conclusion is derived from two premises (statements). | Statements $\implies$ Conclusion |
| Statement | A proposition considered true for the purpose of the argument. | "All A are M", "No M is B" |
| Conclusion | A judgment or decision reached by reasoning. | "Some M are A", "Some B are M" |
| Universal Affirmative (All X are Y) | Every member of the first category is also a member of the second. | All dogs are mammals. |
| Universal Negative (No X is Y) | No member of the first category is a member of the second. | No cat is a dog. |
| Particular Affirmative (Some X are Y) | At least one member of the first category is a member of the second. | Some students are engineers. |
| Particular Negative (Some X are not Y) | At least one member of the first category is not a member of the second. | Some birds are not sparrows. |
Understanding basic rules of inference helps solve syllogism problems. A key rule used here is that a universal affirmative statement ("All A are M") implies a particular affirmative statement ("Some M are A"). However, a universal negative statement ("No M is B") implies its converse ("No B is M"), but it does not imply any particular affirmative statement like "Some B are M".
Also, combining a universal affirmative and a universal negative statement requires careful consideration of the middle term (M in this case). If All A are M and No M is B, the connection through the middle term M establishes that there can be no connection between A and B.
Practice with different types of statements and conclusions helps in mastering logical deduction skills required for syllogism questions.
Statements: Some pens are papers. All papers are books. Conclusions: I. Some pens are books. II. All books are pens.
Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement:
All birds are animals. Some animals are tigers. No tiger is a bird.
Conclusions:
I. Some tigers are birds.
II. Some animals are not birds.
Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows.
Statement:
All pens are blue things. Some blue things are plastic. No plastic is recyclable.
Conclusions:
I. Some pens are plastic.
II. Some blue things are not recyclable.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
Some students are players.
All players are male.
Conclusions:
I. All males are players.
II. Some males are students.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
No creative is an employer.
All experts are creative.
All workers are experts.
Conclusions:
I. No employer is an expert.
II. No worker is an employer.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
Some actors are choreographers.
All choreographers are producers.
Not a single producer is a director.
Conclusions:
I. Some actors are directors.
II. Not a single actor is a director.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements :
1. All flowers are tulips.
2. No tulips are whites.
Conclusions :
I. All tulips are flowers.
II. Some tulips are whites.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
All rats are dogs.
Some rats are hens.
Conclusions:
I. Some rats are dogs.
II. Some hens are rats.