Syllogism with a universal negative — identify the necessary outcomes Statements: • Some books are pens. • No pen is pencil. Conclusions to evaluate: I. Some pens are books. II. Some pencils are books. III. Some books are not pencils. IV. All pencils are books.

Introduction / Context:
This question mixes a particular affirmative with a universal negative. The goal is to see how an explicit exclusion (no pen is pencil) interacts with an overlap (some books are pens).

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Bk = books, Pe = pens, Pc = pencils.
• Some Bk are Pe.
• No Pe is Pc.

Concept / Approach:
The statement some Bk are Pe is symmetric for the some-conclusion: if some books are pens, then some pens are books. Also, combining the existence of book-pen items with no pen is pencil immediately yields that at least one book is not a pencil.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Example: Let Bk = {b1, b2}, Pe = {b1}, Pc = {c1}. The premises hold. I and III are true (b1 is a pen-book and not a pencil). II and IV remain unprovable.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I follows: misses the necessary exclusion in III.
• Only II and III / Only I and II: each includes a conclusion not supported by the premises.
• None of these: option C already states the correct pair.

Common Pitfalls:
Forgetting that some A are B immediately implies some B are A; trying to infer relations to pencils without any link.

Final Answer:
Only I and III follow