DXC Logical Syllogism Quiz -2

Explanation :
Analyzing
Conclusion I - No bat is bird.
Common term 'Sky' is not distributed even once in either Statement 2 or 3, we can't relate between the classes 'bat' and 'bird'. Hence,Conclusion 1,doesn't follow.

Conclusion II - All birds being animals is a possibility.
Since we can't relate between the classes 'animal' and 'bird', possibilities between them are possible. Conclusion 2, here makes sense.

Explanation:
Analyzing Conclusion I : Some artists are not singers.
Some artists are actors (reverse of Statement 2) + No actor is singer (reverse of Statement 1)
= Some artists are not singers. Clearly, Conclusion 1 follows.

Analyzing Conclusion II :
Some actors are artists + No artist is artisan
= Some actors are not artisans. Since reverse of an Partial Negative statement is not possible, Conclusion 2 doesn't follow.

Explanation :

Analyzing Conclusion I : Some wells are not seas.
Neither Statement 1 nor 2 is a negative statement.
So, negative conclusion between the classes of 'wells' and 'seas' is not possible. Hence, Conclusion 1,doesn't follow.
Analyzing Conclusion II : Some seas may not be rivers.
In Statement 3 : 'Some rivers are not seas'. Here, we are not sure of the elements of the class 'seas'. So, it means that 'Some seas may not be rivers'.
Conclusion 2, hence, follows.

Explanation:
Analyzing Conclusion I and II together : 'Some saucers are bowls' and 'Not a single saucer is bowl'
Clearly, all are type I statements, we can't relate between classes that exist in 2 different statements.
Similarly, we can't relate between the classes 'saucer' and 'bowl' either.
But, Conclusion 1 is a type I statement and Conclusion 2 is type E, and they together form an E+I combination.
Hence, either Conclusion 1 or Conclusion 2 follows.

Explanation :
Analyzing Conclusion 1 : Some geysers are calculators.
Since the classes 'geysers' and 'calculators' appear in different sentences, and the common term 'electric goods' is not mentioned once in any conclusion. As a result, no definitive link can be established between these two classes. As a result, Conclusion I does not follow.
Analyzing Conclusion 2 : Some calculators are geysers.
According to the same logic discussed above, we can claim that Conclusion 2 doesn't follow either.

Explanation :
Analyzing Conclusion 1 : Thor is not a Superhero.
Using Statement 2 and Statement 1, we get
Thor is a literate [Affirmative] + No literate is a Superhero [Universal Negative] = Thor is not a Superhero. Hence, Conclusion 1 follows.
Analyzing Conclusion 2 : Thor may be a Superhero.
From Conclusion 1, we got ‘Thor is not a Superhero’ is a Solid conclusion.
Therefore Thor may be a Superhero is not a possible preposition.
Hence, Conclusion 2, doesn't follow.

Explanation :
Analyzing Conclusion 1 : A criminal is a literate.
Using Statement 2 and Statement 1, we will get
A criminal is a graduate [Affirmative] + A graduate is a literate [Affirmative] = A criminal is a literate. Hence, Conclusion 1 follows.
Analyzing Conclusion 2 : Some men are criminals.
Converse of the conclusion derived above = Some men are criminals. Hence, Conclusion 2 follows as well.

Explanation :
Analyzing Conclusion 1 : Leonard is selected.
Using Statement 1 [All selected are toppers] and Statement 2.
We will get,
Leonard is a topper [Affirmative] + All selected are toppers [Affirmative] ⇒ No definite conclusion. Clearly, Conclusion 1 doesn't follow.
Analyzing Conclusion 2 : 'Only Leonard is selected' or 'All selected are Leonard'.
So, using facts of Conclusion 1, we can conclude that Conclusion 2 doesn't follow either.

Explanation :
All entrances are windows [Affirmative] + All windows are doors [Affirmative] + No gate is a door [Universal Negative]
= No door is a gate [Universal Negative] = A + E = E = No entrance is a gate.
Hence, conclusion II follows .
Again,
All window are doors [Affirmative] + No gate is a door [Universal Negative] = No door is a gate [Universal Negative] = A + E = E = No window is a gate.
Thus, conclusion I does not follow.

Explanation :
All bottles are cans (Affirmative) + [No saucer is a can (Universal Negative)] = No can is a saucer (Universal Negative)
= No bottle is a saucer.
Hence, conclusion I follows.
Again ,
All bottles are cans Affirmative = Some cans are bottles (Partial Affirmative). It means,
At least some cans are bottles.
Hence conclusion II follows.
Thus, both conclusion I and II follow.