Discussion

Question:

Directions: Each question has a set of four statements. Each statement has three segments. Choose the alternative where the third segment in the statement can be logically deduced using both the preceding two, but not just from one of them.

A. All earthquakes cause havoc. Some landslides cause havoc. Some earthquakes cause landslides.
B. All glass things are transparent. Some curios are glass things. Some curios are transparent.
C. All clay objects are brittle. All XY are clay objects. Some XY are brittle.
D. No criminal is a patriot. Ram is not a patriot. Ram is a criminal.

Explanation:

(c) ‘C and B’ is the correct answer choice.
Statement A is invalid because it has four terms:
a. Earthquakes
b. Things that cause havoc
c. Landslides
d. Things that cause landslides
Statement B is valid as the ‘Some C’ which are GT are also T (shaded portion).

T = Transparent
GT = Glass things
C = Curios
As all glass things (GT) are transparent (T), those curios (C) that are GT are definitely T.
Statement C is valid:

B = Brittle things
CO = Clay objects
CO is a subset of B.
XY is a subset of CO.
Therefore, XY is also a subset of B.
Thus, all XY are also brittle.
Statement D is invalid.
No valid conclusion can follow from two negative premises, as negatives have the effect of separating one term from the other.

» Your doubt will be displayed only after approval.

Discussion

Doubts

Feedback