Verbal Reasoning - Syllogism - Discussion

1. "Some pens are pencils" cannot follow since in the syllogism, the middle term (pen)is not distributed. This is shown by the fig.1 given. in deductive arguments conclusions that are ceratain can only be considered.

2. "Some pens are papers" follows from "Some papers are pens" using the rule of conversion.

Hence the ansswer is B; "Only (2) conclusion follows"

If possible, use Venn diagrams or Syllogistic rules to solve such problems.

The diagrams of the type given above may not exhaust all possibilities and hence can be erroneous.

Even in using such diagrams, look for the possibility of rejecting the conclusion rather than accepting it. If there is any possibility to reject, reject it.

In addition, one may use the rules of opposition (contradictory, contrary, sub-contrary and sub-alternation) and eduction such as conversion obversion contraposition and inversion to attempt all such problems.

-----------

1. "Some pens are pencils" cannot follow since in the syllogism, the middle term is not distributed. This is shown by the fig.1 given. In deductive arguments conclusions that are certain can only be considered.

2. "Some pens are papers" follows using the rule of conversion from "Some papers are pens".

Hence the answer is B "Only (2) conclusion follows"

Dr. E Rajeevan
e_r(at)rediffmail.com

Let's evaluate each conclusion:

Some pens are pencils.

This conclusion can be derived from the given statements since we know that some papers are pens and all pencils are pens, it implies that there must be an overlapping region between pens and pencils. (True)

Some pens are paper.

This conclusion cannot be derived from the given statements. The statements only provide information about the relationship between papers and pens and between pencils and pens. There is no direct connection between papers and pencils on the given premises. (False)

So, the correct option is:
a) Only (1) conclusion follows

Explanation:
The first conclusion (Some pens are pencils) follows logically from the given statements since there is an overlap between the sets of papers and pencils within the set of pens.

However, the second conclusion (Some pens are paper) does not follow the given statements. There is no direct link established between papers and pencils in the provided premises. Therefore, we cannot draw this conclusion with certainty.

Here the first statement is particular positive and the second statement is universal positive.

According to rule in 2 statement question there can be only 3 terms in 2 statement question.

I have solved like this:

1) I have converted the second statement in particular positive like some pens are pencil as there are 3 terms we have to make a->b then b->c.

So I have converted. But when both statements we take conclusion then as particular positive statement can be given conclusion only when 2 statement should be of universal positive or universal negative.

Then only both statement will conclude. So the answer should be neither follows. Then why E please reply.

As per rules, no trivial (particular) solution can be drawn for this question. There can be many solutions like 1. All pencils are papers.

2. Some pencils are papers, 3. Some papers are pencils, 4. Some Pens are pencils and 5. Some pens are papers. Now, has the option been 'no conclusion can be drawn', then that would have been the clear answer. But since there are options which holds true for 2 of our conclusions (4&5) , we can say that both follows rather than saying neither follows.

The first thing, in the rule of conversion do the following things.

1. All can be convert to some.
2. Some to some.
3. No to no.

Ex:.

1. All pens are paper (statement).

Conclusion: Some papers are pen (change the subject and predicate).

Here Subject is pens and predicate us paper.

2. Some pens are paper (statement).

Some papers are pens (conclusion).

3. No pen is paper (statement).

No paper is pen (conclusion).

So that both follows. Got it?

@Anvita.

We are missing another fact that we check for distribution for the middle term only if a Conclusion is derived from the two statements! Since here both the conclusions are independently derived from a single statement, there is no reason for why should we look for middle term distribution. Accordingly, both statements follow here, so correct Option comes out to be E applying all the Aristotle's Rules. Thanks.

The answer is correct because we can reverse both statements and come to the conclusion where the first one can be reversed from "Some papers are pens" to "Some pens are paper" and similarly, the second statement can also be reversed from "All the pencils are pens" to "Some pen are pencils". Hence we can say that both conclusions are true i.e. option E. Both (1) and (2) follow.

Neither 1 nor 2 follows, this should be the answer, because in sentence "Some papers are pens" : papers and both are not-distributed and in sentence "All the pencils are pens" : pencils is distributed and pens are not-distributed so, if the common predicate (here is pens) is not distributed at least one time, then we can not draw any conclusion.

So, option 4 (D) is correct.

Since the "Middle Term" of the given two statements is not distributed. Hence Neither of the conclusion follows.

(or)

Clearly, since both premises are particular, no conclusion follows.

Condition: The Middle Term (M) should be distributed at least once in the premises, the conclusion cannot follow.

Condition: If both premises are particular, no conclusion follows.

Some pens are pencils - CORRECT cause we know that ALL Pencils are Pens( Pencil are all inside Pens).
Some pens are papers- WE CAN NOT AFFIRM THIS. Since as the figure shows, the pencil can be OR NOT in the middle. The only thing we can ensure is that Pencil is inside Pens. Nothing less
So, in my opinion, the answer A is correct: Only 1 follows.