Syllogism — Benches, tables, and chairs (direction of inclusion): Statements: (a) All benches are tables. (b) No table is a chair. Conclusions to test: I. All benches are chairs. II. All tables are benches. III. No tables are benches. IV. No benches are chairs.

Introduction / Context:
Here we combine a universal inclusion with a universal exclusion. The goal is to respect the direction of inclusion and not convert statements illicitly.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Bench ⊆ Table.
• Table ∩ Chair = ∅.

Concept / Approach:
If all benches are tables and no table is a chair, then benches—being tables—cannot be chairs. Other conclusions either reverse the inclusion or contradict the premises.

Step-by-Step Assessment:
1) I “All benches are chairs” contradicts Table ∩ Chair = ∅ because benches are tables.2) II “All tables are benches” reverses Bench ⊆ Table and is not implied.3) III “No tables are benches” is false; benches are a subset of tables, so that intersection is non-empty if benches exist.4) IV “No benches are chairs” follows immediately from benches ⊆ tables and tables disjoint from chairs.

Common Pitfalls:
Conflating “All A are B” with “All B are A,” and ignoring that a subset inherits all disqualifications that apply to the superset.

Final Answer:
Only conclusion IV follows.