Statements:
1. All laptops are computers.
2. Some computers are tablets.
3. All tablets are devices.
Conclusions:
I. Some laptops are devices.
II. Some computers are devices.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
There is no direct connection given between laptops and tablets/devices, so Conclusion I does not follow. Since some computers are tablets, and all tablets are devices, those computers must be devices. Thus, Conclusion II follows.
Explanation:
I: fish is meat, so it's plausible, but the statement doesn't guarantee it; some cats may not eat fish. II is a reverse error. Neither follows logically from the given statement.
Statement:
Despite heavy security, a theft occurred in the museum.
Conclusions:
I. The security guards were involved in the theft.
II. Heavy security is not a 100% guarantee against theft.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
The statement simply states a fact that theft occurred despite security. Assuming guard involvement (I) is speculation. However, it logically proves that heavy security does not entirely eliminate the possibility of theft (II).
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!