Syllogism — Soldiers, citizens, and men: Statements: • All soldiers are men. • Some citizens are soldiers. Conclusions to test: I. Some citizens are men. II. All soldiers are citizens.

Introduction / Context:
We combine a universal inclusion with a particular statement to test if a specific existential conclusion follows.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• All soldiers are men (Soldier ⊆ Man).
• Some citizens are soldiers (∃ Citizen ∩ Soldier).

Concept / Approach:
From Soldier ⊆ Man, any soldier is a man. Since some citizens are soldiers, those very citizens are men; hence “Some citizens are men.” There is no basis to claim every soldier is a citizen.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Take the citizens who are soldiers (exist by premise).2) Map them through Soldier ⊆ Man to conclude they are men.3) Hence I follows. II claims Soldier ⊆ Citizen, which is not given.

Verification / Alternative check:
A model with 10 citizens who are soldiers among many other soldiers suffices; II fails.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(b) denies a necessary inference; (c) asserts an unsupported universal; (d) overstates.

Common Pitfalls:
Concluding a universal from a particular (“some” → “all”).

Final Answer:
Only I follows.