Universal–universal with exclusion: From 'All flowers are trees' and 'No fruit is tree', assess whether the conclusions (I) 'No fruit is flower' and (II) 'Some trees are flowers' follow beyond doubt in standard syllogism.

Given data

• Premise 1: All Flowers ⊆ Trees.
• Premise 2: No Fruit is a Tree (Fruit ∩ Tree = ∅).
• Conclusions: (I) No Fruit is a Flower. (II) Some Trees are Flowers.

Concept/Approach

(I) is a standard syllogistic inference: if Flowers are among Trees and Fruits are excluded from Trees, then Fruits are excluded from Flowers. (II) is an existential import commonly assumed in aptitude syllogisms: if 'All Flowers are Trees' and Flowers exist, then at least some Trees are Flowers.

Step-by-step calculation/logic

Verification/Alternative

Venn diagram: put Flowers wholly inside Trees; draw Fruit disjoint from Trees. Then both conclusions are visually evident.

Common pitfalls

• Rejecting (II) due to confusion about existential import; aptitude syllogism sets usually accept it.

Final Answer
Both I and II follow.