Discussion :: Syllogism - Syllogism 3 (Q.No.1)
In each of the following questions there are three statements. Which are followed by three or four conclusions. Choose the conclusions which logically follow from the given statements.
|Rajesh said: (Jul 21, 2010)|
|According to figure all locks are bats but how bats become locks because lock is part of bat. Bat can become lock but lock can't become bat.|
|Ashwanth said: (Nov 24, 2010)|
|Thank you but iam somewhat poor in venn diagrams so please let me know another method in solving these type of problems please|
|Ann said: (Jan 4, 2011)|
|According to the third figure some portion of watches are keys. So conclusion 2 is also correct.|
|Ravish said: (Jan 5, 2011)|
|Conclusions should be true in all diagram. Conclusion 2 does not follow in diagram 1.|
|Deepak Varshney said: (Jan 17, 2011)|
|This is also the rule in venn diagram, conclusion should follow in all dig. ?.|
|Niteesha said: (Apr 16, 2011)|
|I want some more techniques in this method.|
|Sri said: (Apr 26, 2011)|
|According to the third figure some portion of watches are keys.
So, Conclusion 2 is also correct.
|Manu said: (Jun 11, 2011)|
|Please I need some more techniques to solve these problems. I was confusing with venn diagrams. Can anyone explain me.|
|Priya said: (Sep 2, 2011)|
|Thanks to ravish, am clear with the answer now.|
|Manoj Kumar said: (Jan 5, 2012)|
|By Raval's notations statements are LL - K, KK - B, W - B now conclusions can be deduced at a glance.First conclusion B - L follows on linking B to L in KK - B and LL - K through common linking term K as it becomes double.Second conclusion W - K does not follow because common linking term B remains single on linking W -B and KK - B.Third conclusion KK - L does not follow because of absence of any common linking term.|
|Chinny said: (Jan 8, 2012)|
|According to figure there may be chance to occur "some watches are keys" then why did it go wrong.|
|Anu said: (Jan 18, 2012)|
|According to figure 2 and 3 some watches are keys then why the conclusion 2 does not follow?|
|Ravinder Kumar said: (Jan 22, 2012)|
|When one solves syllogism problems by Euler circles then a conclusion is true only if it is true in all possible diagrams i.e if a conclusion is not true in any one of Euler circle then it does not follow. Some watches are keys is not true in figure 1 so it does not follows.|
|Nikki said: (Mar 29, 2012)|
|Conclusion should be true in diagram 1 and 2, but conclusion does not follow in diagram 1, so how conclusion 2 true ?|
|Harish said: (May 30, 2012)|
|I understand the three venn diagram but as per diagram-1 answer b is correct but if we use another diagram then we get another option also so how can we eliminate the another option or how can we take decision that which diagram is correct?|
|Preethi said: (Aug 17, 2012)|
|Yes, I too thinking that conclusion 2 is correct. If somebody got exactly the correct meaning, please explain it here|
|Sarvesh Chaudhary said: (Aug 27, 2012)|
|@sri you are absolutly right.|
|Kalpna said: (Sep 6, 2013)|
|Why we draw 3 venn diagram ? if 1 diagram is able to answer the conclusion.|
|Rahul Shukla said: (Nov 11, 2013)|
|We draw the possible vein diagram in every case. Here 3 cases are possible and statements must satisfy all three of them. If a single statement is not satisfied then it can't be true.
|Max said: (Sep 5, 2014)|
|At last, venn diagrams helping me to get correct answer.|
|Kalyan Kumar Reddy Valluru said: (Oct 19, 2014)|
|Can't we add one more figure like your example : 2 >> figure : 3 for this question?|
|Arjun said: (Dec 3, 2014)|
|Why not 2nd comment follow? Its following in 2 diagram.|
|Krishna said: (Feb 12, 2015)|
|The answer should be option no. 1, because from 2nd and 3rd figure, some watches are keys also follows!|
|Deep said: (Mar 25, 2015)|
|Option 1 is incorrect according to me as in the given statement "All the locks are keys. All the keys are bats. Some watches are bats" and option 1 is "Some bats are locks" which is not possible as there is no middle term in the given 1st and last statement if we relate these two.|
|Kalmesh said: (Mar 31, 2015)|
|I think there is no universal method in solving this? By any method if we start answering the answer should be same, but here the case is different, I think its sensitive because we can't say the second and third diagram mentioned is wrong.
That could even happen, also these second and third concepts are not mentioned particularly in the question we can't consider that as right. This is my personal opinion.
|Anshuman said: (Jul 31, 2015)|
|There is a method for Euler circle i.e. if there are more than 1 diagrams then always intersection is taken into account.|
|Upendra Majhi said: (Sep 10, 2015)|
|When we arrive at ""some locks are keys "" and ""some bats are keys, "".
We get some bats are locks as correct as subjects are comparable due to predicates i.e."keys"being equal, whereas predicates are not comparable if subjects are equal.
In this case some watches are keys, watch and key are predicates of some bats are watches (true). And some bats are keys.
|Upendra Majhi said: (Sep 11, 2015)|
|Applying venn diagram and deductive logic in the four forms of premises that is A, E, I and O and further getting their derivatives will help in solving the syllogism problems.|
|Roma said: (Sep 16, 2015)|
|Means statement 2 is not correct in all diagram. That's why its wrong ?|
|Harshita said: (Oct 6, 2015)|
|Why 2 is not right? Give the answer please.|
|Prakash Kumar said: (Oct 27, 2015)|
|Answer is both A and B are true. If all lock is key then it can be some key is lock (not all key is lock).|
|Saurabh said: (Apr 19, 2016)|
|What about 2nd conclusion?|
|Dipanshu Gupta said: (Jun 25, 2016)|
|I can't able to understand this question. Please help me.|
|Sanjana said: (Jul 1, 2016)|
|All the three diagrams must fulfil the conclusions? Is it true? Then only it can be considered as a conclusion?|
|Viswa said: (Jul 1, 2016)|
|Answer is A. Both conclusion 1 and 2 are correct.|
|Priya D said: (Aug 26, 2016)|
|Yeah. All possible diagrams should satisfy the conclusion. For the conclusion to be true.|
|Santanu said: (Sep 15, 2016)|
|According to me, both the conclusions 1 and 2 are correct.|
|Shibnath Salui said: (Sep 26, 2016)|
|As per the 2nd figure, why some watches are not keys?
I think option B is the right answer.
|Vinu said: (Mar 15, 2017)|
|I think Conclusion 2 is also correct.
So, the correct Answer is option: A.
|Shubham Malik said: (Jun 14, 2017)|
|When the terms are more than two we apply some another method. First of all the basic Venn diagram of the statement that totally satisfies it. Then we enlarge it as all L, K, B in one circle and another by BW. So according to this, 1 and 3 should be true.|
|Prashanth said: (Jun 19, 2017)|
|I am not sure weather it is correct or not. But what I have understood observing all the problems. We use third possibility diagram when all the statements are having only SOME without having ALL. We use only first Diagram when one of the statements Starts with ALL.|
|Vinod said: (Aug 13, 2017)|
|Yes, conclusion 2 is correct.|
|Revanth said: (Aug 16, 2017)|
|Option A is correct.|
|Ankita Kar said: (Aug 30, 2017)|
|Option A should be correct. According to the diagram no 2 it clearly showing that some watches are keys. So what's wrong in that case? please explain.|
|Gvd said: (Apr 2, 2018)|
It can be an answer only if the given condition is possible in all figures. If not it is not a conclusion and that's why option 2 is not an answer.
|Mane said: (Aug 5, 2018)|
|I think Option 3 is also correct.|
|Shree said: (Oct 4, 2018)|
|A is the correct answer according to me.|
|Rupchand said: (Mar 16, 2019)|
|From 2nd premises we can write Some bats are keys. And in 3rd premises.
Some watches are bats. Then we conclude Some watches are keys.
So, Option A is correct. Because statement 1 and 2 is correct.
Post your comments here:
Email : (optional)
» Your comments will be displayed only after manual approval.