In the question two statements are given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements.
Statement I: No cans are jars
Statement II: All tins are cans
Conclusion I: All jars are tins
Conclusion II: No tins are jars
- AOnly conclusion I follows
- BOnly conclusion II follows
- CBoth conclusions I and II follow
- DNeither conclusion I nor conclusion II follows
Solution & Step-by-step Explanation
Let's evaluate using Venn distributions:
Statement I tells us that the set of 'Cans' and 'Jars' have completely no intersection (Cans∩Jars=∅).
Statement II tells us that 'Tins' is entirely inside 'Cans' (Tins⊆Cans).
Analysis of Conclusions:
Conclusion I: All jars are tins. Since Tins are entirely inside Cans and Cans cannot touch Jars, no Jars can be Tins. Thus, Conclusion I does not follow.
Conclusion II: No tins are jars. Since Tins are part of Cans, and no part of Cans can be Jars, it is definitely true that no Tins are Jars. Thus, Conclusion II follows.
Therefore, only conclusion II follows.
Statement I tells us that the set of 'Cans' and 'Jars' have completely no intersection (Cans∩Jars=∅).
Statement II tells us that 'Tins' is entirely inside 'Cans' (Tins⊆Cans).
Analysis of Conclusions:
Conclusion I: All jars are tins. Since Tins are entirely inside Cans and Cans cannot touch Jars, no Jars can be Tins. Thus, Conclusion I does not follow.
Conclusion II: No tins are jars. Since Tins are part of Cans, and no part of Cans can be Jars, it is definitely true that no Tins are Jars. Thus, Conclusion II follows.
Therefore, only conclusion II follows.