Logical Reasoning - Logical Deduction - Discussion
In each of the following questions, three statements are given followed by four conclusions numbered I, II, III and TV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some papers are cats. All cats are bats. No bat is horse.
Conclusions:
- Some papers are horses.
- No horse is cat.
- Some bats are papers.
- All papers are bats.
Some papers are cats. All cats are bats.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some papers are bats'. III is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
All cats are bats. No bat is horse.
Since both the premises are universal and one premise is negative, the conclusion must be universal negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'No cat is horse'. II is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Some papers are bats. No bat is horse.
Since one premise is particular and the other negative, the conclusion must be particular negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some papers are not horses'.