Verbal Reasoning - Syllogism - Discussion

Hi All,

The given answer is perfectly correct. Let me explain.

When we say the conclusion follows the given statements?

Ans:

Step 1: Draw the all possibility of Venn diagrams.
Step 2: Check the given conclusions against each diagram.
Step 3: If the conclusion follows (or satisfy) ALL the diagrams, then we can say 'it follows' the given statements.


Now, take a look at the given problem:

1. Some dogs are cats. (Not Follows)

Reason: It doesn't follow the given statements in case of first (left-side) diagram. Because some Dogs may not be Cats as per the first diagram.

2. Some cats are dogs. (Not Follows)

Reason: It doesn't follow the given statements in case of first (left-side) diagram. Because some Cats may not be Dogs as per the first diagram.

Result: Thus the given conclusions doesn't follow in the case if first diagram (even though it follows as per second diagram), we conclude that 'BOTH CONCLUSION NOT FOLLOWS THE GIVEN STATEMENTS' or 'Neither (1) nor (2) follows'.

Hope you understand guys. Have a nice day!

We can see here it's a case of complementary pairs, if we look at it closely both the possibility are wrong but you see in the answer A option is there as either.

For example, take a set A={5, . }, B={5, . }, C={5, . } now when we say some A is B we can see that in set A and B we have one common element as 5 but the rest information is not know to us this leads two cases the remaining may either be same or either it may be entirely different but in case of syllogism we mark the answer on the basis of 100% true validity of the given information since we are given only a part of the information we can't conclude anything here comes the concept of complimentary pair. Please search google for more idea on complimentary pairs. Thank you and All the best.

Answer is correct. Although it may seem that from Venn diagram 2 the answer is not correct but its just an assumption that some dogs are bats as shown in the diagram 2. Because nowhere its mentioned that some dogs are bats or some bats are dogs. We have just assumed the probability that some dogs may be bats and vice versa. So we cannot conclude over that assumption. So the answer.

I think the answer will be E.

Because some dogs are cats so in the second diagram some dogs are cats in the picture also some cats are dogs also it is there in the diagram some cars are dogs.

They have mentioned only some right it can be on or 100? So is this answer e.

The 2nd diagram shows the answer is e.

Please give the exact answer for this question.

@All.

The explanation is also wrong.

Here, Diagram A implies that the only bats that are cats are those that are not dogs. Which is not specified in the problem. It said: Some dogs are bats. Some bats (which may be dogs according to Statement A) are cats.

The problem never said that the only time a bat is also a cat is if it is not a dog.

Firstly we have to make Venn diagrams for all the possibilities which arise in the statements. Then jump onto conclusions and check whether the conclusions are true in all the diagrams. If yes, the conclusion follows. If it is not correct even in one case, that means that conclusion does not follow.
Rest all depends on practice.

Thanks

For an answer to be right, all the conditions must be satisfied, and for it to be wrong, one anomaly is enough.

For e.g. consider x/x..well, we may say x/x is 1, if x belongs to real numbers, but that is incorrect, since at x=0, 0/0 is not defined..since one value of x creates anomaly, thus we dont write x/x=1, for all x belongs to R.

The first diagram of the syllogism between bats and cats are wrong in relation to dogs, just because it in order for dogs to be cats it has to go into bats first, it will then not negate the fact that it has the possibility of it being a cat. Conclusion one should follow and latter cannot because the process is not reversed.

Another way of seeing it.

In order for a syllogism to be valid, at least one of the two premises must contain a universal form. If both premises are particulars, then no valid conclusion can follow. For example, if "some cats are black" and "some black things are tables", it does not follow that "some cats are tables".

Well. If the ones who are telling that opt D is right because of possibility case! why not consider the 2nd diagram as the real case, and the first one as a possibility? Then the answer will be different.

According to me, the 2nd diagram is correct!