Statements:
1. All cars are vehicles.
2. Some vehicles are not machines.
Conclusions:
I. Some cars are not machines.
II. All vehicles are cars.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
We know all cars are vehicles, but the vehicles that are not machines might be entirely outside the 'cars' circle. Therefore, Conclusion I is not definite. Conclusion II is a reverse of an 'All' statement, which is generally invalid. Neither follows.
Statement:
All employees of this company are highly educated.
Conclusions:
I. The company only hires individuals with advanced degrees.
II. An uneducated person cannot be an employee of this company.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
The statement says all current employees are highly educated, which implies an uneducated person is not among them (Conclusion II follows). However, 'highly educated' does not necessarily mean 'advanced degrees' (Ph.D., Master's, etc.), so Conclusion I is an over-assumption.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!