Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II follows, and
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:The universal statement applies to works by Plato: none is of “small” literary value. We are asked about a specific work, Critias (“Kritiat”).
Given Data / Assumptions:Universal claim: For any work W, if W is by Plato, then literary value of W is not small.
Concept / Approach:To reach Conclusion I we would need an extra premise that Critias is of small literary value; to reach Conclusion II we would need that Critias is indeed a work of Plato. Neither is provided.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Conclusion I: “Critias is of small literary value and thus cannot be Plato’s work.” The first clause is unproven; not entailed.Conclusion II: “Critias can be one of the works of Plato.” The stem does not state authorship of Critias; possibility alone is not a necessary conclusion.Verification / Alternative check:Both worlds (Critias by Plato with high value; Critias not by Plato) are consistent with the universal statement, which says nothing about titles not identified as Plato’s.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:Choosing I assumes a fact about value; choosing II assumes authorship.
Common Pitfalls:Misusing a universal to infer membership of a particular in the set.
Final Answer:if neither I nor II follows, and
Discussion & Comments