Join 60,000+ competitive exam aspirants
Statements: Some tables are chairs. No chair is a bed. Conclusions: I. Some tables are not beds. II. All beds are tables.
Only I follows
Only II follows
Both I and II follow
Neither I nor II follows
Only I follows
Focus on the negative bridge: if 'Some A are B' and 'No B is C', then the portion of A that is B cannot be C, proving 'Some A are not C'.
Focus on the negative bridge: if 'Some A are B' and 'No B is C', then the portion of A that is B cannot be C, proving 'Some A are not C'.
Analyze Statement 1
Some tables are chairs. This implies there is a common region between the circle representing tables and the circle representing chairs.
Analyze Statement 2
No chair is a bed. This means the chair circle and the bed circle are disjoint. Crucially, the portion of tables that overlaps with chairs cannot be part of the bed circle.
Verify Conclusion I
Conclusion I says 'Some tables are not beds'. Since the tables that are also chairs cannot be beds (due to No chair is bed), it is definitely true that these specific tables are not beds.
Verify Conclusion II
Conclusion II says 'All beds are tables'. This is not necessarily true because the statement does not define any relationship between the remainder of the tables and the beds. We can draw beds completely outside of tables.
B: Conclusion II is not necessarily true as there is no link between beds and the non-chair part of tables. C: Both cannot follow because conclusion II is invalid. D: Conclusion I follows logically, so neither cannot be the answer.
A is correct because the portion of tables that are chairs is restricted by the 'No chair is bed' condition, forcing that portion to be 'not beds'.
In Syllogism, always look for 'definite' versus 'possibility' conclusions; if a conclusion uses 'All' or 'No', it must hold true in all possible valid Venn diagrams to be considered correct.