Conclusions:
Conclusions:
All fruits are vegetables. All pens are vegetables. All vegetables are rains.
Conclusions:
All fruits are vegetables. All vegetables are rains.
The conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term.
So, it follows that 'All fruits are rains'. Thus, I follows.
All pens are vegetables. All vegetables are rains.
Clearly, it follows that 'All pens are rains'. Thus, II follows.
Conclusions:
Since one premise is particular and the other negative, the conclusion must be particular negative (O-type) and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some towels are not soaps'. No brush is soap. All soaps are rats.
Since the middle term is distributed twice, the conclusion must be particular. Since one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative. So, it follows that 'Some brushes are not rats'. Since I and II involve the same terms and form a complementary pair, so either I or II follows.
Conclusions:
Some pictures are frames. Some frames are idols.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows.
Some frames are idols. All idols are curtains.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some frames are curtains'. III is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Some pictures are frames. Some frames are curtains.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion can be drawn.
Conclusions:
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows.
Some rivers are deserts. All deserts are roads.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and shouldn't contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some rivers are roads'. I is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Some hills are rivers. Some rivers are roads.
Again, since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows.
Conclusions:
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some saints are bats'. Thus, II follows. Some tigers are balls. All balls are bats.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some tigers are bats'. I is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Conclusions:
Since the middle term 'books' is not distributed even once in the premises, so no definite conclusion follows.
Some colleges are schools. All schools are books.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term.
So, it follows that 'Some colleges are books'. Thus, III follows.
Some pens are books. Some colleges are books.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion can be drawn.
Hence, only III follows.
Conclusions:
Since both the premises are universal and one premise is negative, the conclusion must be universal negative (E-type) and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'No train is room'. Thus, III follows.
All boats are rooms. No room is bus.
As discussed above, it follows that 'No boat is bus'.
II is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds. All trains are buses. No boat is bus.
Again, it follows that 'No train is boat'. I is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Conclusions:
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.