Wiley Edge Syllogism Quiz-2

Conclusion I: All tablets being colored is a possibility. Since the third statement states that all printers are colored, and the first statement states that all tablets are phones, we can infer that all tablets being colored is a possibility. Conclusion I follows.
Conclusion II: At least some printers are tablets. The second statement states that some phones are printers, but there is no direct information given about the relationship between printers and tablets. Therefore, we cannot conclude that at least some printers are tablets. Conclusion II does not follow.

Conclusion I: It can be determined from the given statements whether some apples are not oranges. The apples that are fruits are definitely not oranges (statement 3). Therefore, the conclusion I follow.
Conclusion II: It is not possible for some bananas to be oranges, as it is stated that no banana is an apple.
Conclusion III: It is not possible to conclude that no fruit is a banana based on the given statements.

Some apples are fruits. (apples ⊂ fruits)
All bananas are fruits. (bananas ⊆ fruits)
No fruit is a vegetable. (fruits ∩ vegetables = ∅)

Conclusion I: Some apples are bananas. We cannot determine this based on the given statements, so it does not follow.
Conclusion II: All vegetables being bananas is a possibility. This is false because the statements do not establish a direct relationship between vegetables and bananas, but the statements mention that all bananas are fruits and no fruit is a vegetable so no banana can be a vegetable. so it is possible for all vegetables to be bananas. Therefore, it does not follows.
Conclusion III: No apple is a banana. This contradicts the given statement "Some apples are fruits," so it does not follow.
Conclusion IV: Some fruits not being apples is a possibility. This is true because the given statements do not state that all fruits are apples, leaving room for the possibility of some fruits not being apples. Therefore, it follows.

Some birds are eagles. (birds ∩ eagles ≠ ∅)
All eagles are predators. (eagles ⊆ predators)
No predator is a herbivore. (predators ∩ herbivores = ∅)

Conclusion I: No herbivore is an eagle. This follows directly from the given statements, as no predator is a herbivore and all eagles are predators. Therefore, it follows.
Conclusion II: Some predators are not birds. We cannot determine this based on the given statements, as the relationship between predators and birds is not clearly defined. Therefore, it does not follow.
Conclusion III: Some birds are not herbivores. This does not follow directly from the given statements.Therefore, it does not follows.

Some flowers are roses. (flowers ∩ roses ≠ ∅)
All roses are red. (roses ⊆ red)
No red is blue. (red ∩ blue = ∅)
Some blues are skies. (blues ∩ skies ≠ ∅)

Conclusion I: Some blues are flowers. We cannot determine this based on the given statements, as the relationship between blues and flowers is not directly established. Therefore, it does not follow.
Conclusion II: Some skies being red is a possibility. This is true because the statements do not establish a direct relationship between skies and red, so it is possible for some skies to be red. Therefore, it follows.
Conclusion III: No blue is a flower. This does not follow directly from the given statements, as no red is blue and all roses are red but only some flowers are roses , so we cannot definitively say about other flowers. Therefore, it does not follow.

No cat is a dog. (cat ∩ dog = ∅)
All dogs are birds. (dogs ⊆ birds)
All birds are trees. (birds ⊆ trees)

All cars are vehicles. (cars ⊆ vehicles)
No vehicle is a bicycle. (vehicle ∩ bicycle = ∅)
Some bicycles are red. (bicycles ∩ red ≠ ∅)

Some cats are not dogs. (cats - dogs ≠ ∅)
All dogs are brown. (dogs ⊆ brown)
No brown is black. (brown ∩ black = ∅)

Some cats are not dogs. (cats - dogs ≠ ∅)
All dogs are friendly. (dogs ⊆ friendly)
No friendly animal is aggressive. (friendly ∩ aggressive = ∅)
Conclusion I: No aggressive animal is a dog. This conclusion follows directly from statement 3, which states that no friendly animal is aggressive. Since all dogs are friendly (statement 2), it implies that no aggressive animal can be a dog. Therefore, Conclusion I follows.
Conclusion II: No cat is aggressive. There is no direct or indirect relation given between cats and aggressive nature. Therefore this conclusion does not follow.
Conclusion III: Some dogs are not cats. Conclusion III does not follows.