Conclusions:
Some spoons are bowls. All bowls are knives.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some spoons are knives'.
All bowls are knives. All knives are forks.
Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that.
'All bowls are forks'. Thus, II follows.
Some spoons are knives. All knives are forks.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term.
So, it follows that 'Some spoons are forks'. IV is the converse of this conclusion and so it follows.
Hence, II, III and IV follow.
Ban is necessary to protect our natural envoirnment .So none of the argument is strong enough
Privatization would no doubt lead to better services.But saying that 'this is the only ' is wrong
Making education free can not ensure full literacy. So argument I is vague. Argument II stands strong.
Clearly ,indulgement in politics trains the students for future leader ship but it sways them from studies .So,either of argument 1 or 2 holds
Religion binds the people together with the name of god.But at the same time it may create differences and ill-will amon people
Clearly spending money on sports can not be avoided merely for social economic problems. But Argument II is strong. Be a sports man and then think on this question.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.