Answer: (1) Some teachers are not Mathematicians — NOT valid.
Easy check:
Teacher ⇒ College Graduate, and no graduate is poor ⇒ Teachers are not poor → (4) valid.
All Poets are poor; graduates aren’t poor ⇒ Poets aren’t teachers → (3) valid.
Some Mathematicians are Poets ⇒ they’re poor ⇒ not graduates ⇒ not teachers → (2) valid.
(1) doesn’t follow: we’re told nothing about teachers vs mathematicians (and there might even be no teachers). Hence (1) is not a valid conclusion.
Answer: Both conclusions follow.
Why:
From “All apples are fruits” and “All fruits are tasty,” it follows that all apples are tasty (I).
And from “All apples are tasty,” we can validly infer the particular statement some tasty things are apples (II), via valid conversion of a universal affirmative (“All A are B ⟹ Some B are A”).
Answer: Only Conclusion 1 follows.
Reasoning:
Given “All engineers are good at math” ($E \to M$):
It implies some good-at-math people are engineers (since at least one engineer would then be in the math-good group) → Conclusion 1 follows.
It does not imply everyone good at math is an engineer ($M \to E$ is not guaranteed) → Conclusion 2 does not follow.
Online Test Series, Information About Examination,
Syllabus, Notification
and More.
Online Test Series, Information About Examination,
Syllabus, Notification
and More.
