[amp_mcq option1=”Only I and II follow” option2=”Only II follows” option3=”Only I and III follow” option4=”Only III follows E. None of these.” correct=”option1″]<\/p>\n
The correct answer is: Only II follows.<\/p>\n
The first statement is “Some saints are balls.” This means that there is at least one saint who is also a ball. The second statement is “All balls are bats.” This means that all balls are bats. The third statement is “Some tigers are balls.” This means that there is at least one tiger who is also a ball.<\/p>\n
The first conclusion is “Some bats are tigers.” This conclusion does not follow from the premises. The premises only say that there is at least one saint who is also a ball, and that all balls are bats. They do not say anything about tigers.<\/p>\n
The second conclusion is “Some saints are bats.” This conclusion does follow from the premises. The premises say that there is at least one saint who is also a ball, and that all balls are bats. Therefore, there must be at least one saint who is also a bat.<\/p>\n
The third conclusion is “All bats are balls.” This conclusion does not follow from the premises. The premises only say that there is at least one saint who is also a ball, and that all balls are bats. They do not say anything about all bats being balls.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the only conclusion that follows from the premises is “Some saints are bats.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
[amp_mcq option1=”Only I and II follow” option2=”Only II follows” option3=”Only I and III follow” option4=”Only III follows E. None of these.” correct=”option1″]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[723],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-44530","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-logical-deduction","no-featured-image-padding"],"yoast_head":"\n