Syllogism — Premises: (a) All pens are papers. (b) No eraser is a paper. Conclusions: I) No eraser is a pen. II) Some papers are pens.

Introduction / Context:
We combine a universal inclusion with a universal exclusion and test both a universal negative and an existential conclusion.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Pens ⊆ Papers.
• Erasers ∩ Papers = ∅.
• Assume at least one pen exists (ordinary context) for the existential statement.

Concept / Approach:
If Erasers are disjoint from Papers and Pens are within Papers, then Erasers and Pens are disjoint (I). Also, if any pen exists, it is a paper, so at least some papers are pens (II).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Venn diagrams depict Pens inside Papers and Erasers disjoint from Papers; both conclusions are immediate.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options denying either I or II contradict the straightforward set relations.

Common Pitfalls:
Overlooking that an existential like 'some papers are pens' is justified by non-emptiness of Pens in typical exam logic.

Final Answer:
Both Conclusions I and II follow.