Syllogism — Spoons, Bowls, Knives, Forks Statements: • Some spoons are bowls. • All bowls are knives. • All knives are forks. Conclusions: I. All spoons are forks. II. All bowls are forks. III. Some knives are bowls. IV. Some forks are spoons.

Introduction / Context:
This syllogism combines one particular overlap and two universal inclusions. We must see which conclusions are compelled. Importantly, from “Some spoons are bowls” and the inclusion chain to forks, we get particular, not universal, results.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Some Spoons ⊆ Bowls (existence of at least one spoon that is a bowl).
• All Bowls ⊆ Knives.
• All Knives ⊆ Forks.

Concept / Approach:
Particulars propagate through universal inclusions: the specific spoon that is a bowl is also a knife, hence also a fork. But “All spoons are forks” is too strong; only “Some forks are spoons” follows. Also, because we already have the existence of bowls (from “Some spoons are bowls”), we can infer “Some knives are bowls” and “All bowls are forks.”

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Witness element x: x ∈ Spoon ∩ Bowl ⇒ x ∈ Knife ⇒ x ∈ Fork. This single element verifies II, III, and IV. I remains unverified and need not be true.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Options a, b, c omit one of the true conclusions (II, III, IV together).
• “All follow” wrongly includes I.

Common Pitfalls:
Overgeneralizing to “all spoons” when only “some spoons” propagate through the chain.

Final Answer:
None of these (because the true set is II, III, and IV together, which is not listed).