In the following logical reasoning question, a couple of statements is followed by suggested conclusions. Taking the given statements to be true, even if they appear to be at variance with commonly known facts, read both conclusions carefully and decide which of them logically follows from the statements. Statements: (I) All cups are plates. (II) Some plates are glass. Conclusions: (I) Some glasses are cups. (II) All glasses are cups.

Introduction / Context:
This question tests standard syllogism reasoning about the relations between three categories: cups, plates, and glasses. You are asked to work only with the logical content of the statements, ignoring real world experience. The aim is to see whether you can correctly judge which conclusions must follow and which are only possibilities or may even be false in some valid arrangement.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement (I): All cups are plates.
• Statement (II): Some plates are glass.
• Conclusion (I): Some glasses are cups.
• Conclusion (II): All glasses are cups.
• We assume no further information beyond what is explicitly stated.

Concept / Approach:
The language “All cups are plates” indicates that the set of cups is a subset of the set of plates. The phrase “Some plates are glass” indicates that there is at least one element which belongs to both the set of plates and the set of glass. To decide whether a conclusion logically follows, we must check if it is true in every possible diagram that respects the statements. If a conclusion fails even in one valid diagram, then it does not logically follow.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Draw a large circle for plates. Place a smaller circle for cups completely inside the plates circle, representing “All cups are plates.”Step 2: Place at least one point or region inside the plates circle that represents plates which are glass, based on “Some plates are glass.” However, the problem does not say that this glass region must intersect the cups circle.Step 3: Analyse conclusion (I): “Some glasses are cups.” For this to be necessarily true, at least one of the plates that are glass must also be a cup. But the statements never force the overlap between the cups region and the glass region inside plates. It is perfectly possible that all plates that are glass are outside the cups circle. Hence conclusion (I) is not guaranteed.Step 4: Analyse conclusion (II): “All glasses are cups.” This is even stronger. It claims that every glass item lies within the set of cups. The data only says some plates are glass and that all cups are plates. Glass items can very well exist outside the cups region, as long as they are plates. Therefore conclusion (II) also does not necessarily follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
To verify, construct a concrete example. Suppose there are 10 plates. Out of them, 3 are cups and 2 are glass, but these 2 are not cups. All other objects are neither cups nor plates. These numbers satisfy both given statements: all cups are plates, and there exist some plates that are glass. In this example, there is no glass that is a cup, so conclusion (I) is false, and clearly not all glasses are cups, so conclusion (II) is also false. Because there exists at least one valid situation where both conclusions fail, neither conclusion logically follows.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A claims that only conclusion (I) follows, which is wrong because we just showed a valid case where no glass object is a cup. Option B claims that only conclusion (II) follows, but that is even stronger and definitely not supported by the statements. Option D says both conclusions follow, which clearly contradicts our counterexample. The only defensible choice is the one that accepts that neither conclusion is logically forced.

Common Pitfalls:
A frequent error in such problems is to assume that “Some plates are glass” automatically implies an overlap with cups simply because cups are also plates. In reality, a subset inside a bigger set is free to occupy any part of that set. Another mistake is to casually convert “All cups are plates” into “All plates are cups,” which reverses the logical relation and leads to wrong conclusions. Careful diagram drawing and strict reading of the statements help avoid these traps.

Final Answer:
The correct logical assessment is that neither conclusion (I) nor conclusion (II) follows from the given statements.