Syllogism — Applying a universal statement to an individual case Statements: • All boys are tall. • Rajiv is a boy. Conclusions: I) Rajiv is tall. II) Rajiv is not tall. Choose the correct evaluation.

Introduction / Context:
Here a universal statement about a category is applied to a named individual within that category. The test is to push the inclusion correctly and reject the contradiction.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• All Boys ⊆ Tall.
• Rajiv ∈ Boys.

Concept / Approach:
If every boy is tall and Rajiv is a boy, then Rajiv must be tall. Any statement that asserts the contrary directly conflicts with the universal premise.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
In a Venn diagram, place Rajiv in the Boys circle, which is inside the Tall circle. The placement makes I true and II impossible.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only II follows: contradicts the universal premise.
• Both follow / Neither follow: cannot be, because I is forced and II is negated by the same premise.

Common Pitfalls:
Overcomplicating a straightforward categorical substitution; suspecting exceptions when none are allowed by the statement “All.”

Final Answer:
Only Conclusion I follows.