Syllogism — Decide which conclusion(s) necessarily follow: Statements: • All pins are bags. • All chalks are bags. • All needles are bags. Conclusions: I. Some needles are pins. II. Some chalks are needles. III. No needle is a pin.

Introduction / Context:
All three categories (pins, chalks, needles) are placed inside a super-set “bags.” The prompt tests recognition of an “either–or” situation with no forced overlap.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• All pins are bags.
• All chalks are bags.
• All needles are bags.

Concept / Approach:
When multiple classes are only related to a common superset and no intersections are specified, two sub-classes may or may not overlap. A conclusion “Some X are Y” is not necessary; “No X is Y” is not necessary either. However, logically, either overlap exists or it does not—making an exclusive “either–or” statement valid in many test conventions.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) From the premises, we cannot force “needles∩pins ≠ ∅” (so I is not necessary).2) Nor can we force “needles∩pins = ∅” (so III is not necessary individually).3) But exactly one of I or III must hold in any model: either there is some overlap or there is none. Hence the standard syllogism key accepts “Either I or III follows.”4) II (“Some chalks are needles”) has no support.

Verification / Alternative check:
Construct two diagrams: (a) needles overlapping pins, (b) needles disjoint from pins. Premises are satisfied in both, but I and III cannot be simultaneously true—thereby validating the exclusive either–or form.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I only / III only: neither is forced alone.
• Including II: unjustified; chalks and needles need not intersect.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming overlap just because classes share a common superset; equating “possibility” with “necessity.”

Final Answer:
Only either I or III follows.