Syllogism with universal and negative premises: From 'All roads are poles' and 'No pole is a house', decide whether the conclusions (I) 'Some roads are houses' and (II) 'Some houses are poles' can be affirmed as logically necessary.

Given data

• Premise 1: Roads ⊆ Poles.
• Premise 2: Poles ∩ Houses = ∅.
• Conclusions: (I) Some Roads are Houses. (II) Some Houses are Poles.

Concept/Approach

If no Pole is a House, then any subset of Poles (including Roads) has empty intersection with Houses. Particular claims asserting such intersections are false.

Step-by-step evaluation

Verification

Venn diagram readily shows disjointness between Poles and Houses, eliminating both conclusions.

Common pitfalls

• Overlooking that a subset (Roads) inherits disjointness from its superset (Poles).

Final Answer
Neither I nor II follows.