Syllogism — Papers, Bags, Books, and Purses Statements: • All the papers are books. • All the bags are books. • Some purses are bags. Conclusions: (1) Some papers are bags. (2) Some books are papers. (3) Some books are purses.

Introduction / Context:
Here we mix two universal statements with one particular statement. The challenge is to see which particular conclusions are compelled by subset relations and which are not forced due to possible non-overlap.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Papers (P) ⊆ Books (B).
• Bags (G) ⊆ Books (B).
• Some Purses (R) are Bags (G): R∩G ≠ ∅.
• Conclusions: (1) Some papers are bags. (2) Some books are papers. (3) Some books are purses.

Concept / Approach:
“All X are Y” creates subset relations. From a subset relation we can assert “Some Y are X” when existence is implicit in such exam settings. For intersection claims across two subsets of the same superset, we cannot assume overlap unless given or compelled.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Draw B as a large set containing two non-overlapping regions P and G. Place some elements in R∩G. Then (2) and (3) are satisfied; (1) remains false. All premises still hold, proving (1) does not follow.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only (1): Fails because (1) is not necessary.
• Only (1) and (2) / Only (1) and (3): Both include (1), which does not follow.
• None of the above: Incorrect because (2) and (3) do follow.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming that two subsets of the same superset must intersect. They need not. Only explicit intersection statements compel that conclusion.

Final Answer:
Only (2) and (3)