Consider the following two statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the two given statements.

Statements: All lawyers are extrovert. Some wise men are extrovert.

Conclusions:
(a) All lawyers are wise men.
(b) All wise men are lawyers.
(c) Some extrovert are wise men.
(d) All extrovert are lawyers.

Question

If all roses are flowers and some flowers are red, which statement must be true?

Answer 1

This question checks how well you apply the rules of syllogism to two statements: "All lawyers are extrovert" and "Some wise men are extrovert." Picture two circles: a small circle for lawyers sitting completely inside a bigger circle for extroverts, and a separate circle for wise men that overlaps the extrovert circle somewhere.

(a) All lawyers are wise men: the lawyer circle sits inside the extrovert circle, and the wise men circle overlaps the extrovert circle in a different, unconnected spot. Nothing forces lawyers and wise men to overlap, so this cannot be drawn.
(b) All wise men are lawyers: this would need the wise men circle to sit entirely inside the lawyer circle, but we only know wise men overlap extroverts, not lawyers directly. This is not supported.
(c) Some extrovert are wise men: "some wise men are extrovert" literally means the wise men and extrovert circles share a region. A shared region is a two way fact, so it is equally true that "some extrovert are wise men." This conclusion always holds.
(d) All extrovert are lawyers: this flips "all lawyers are extrovert" into "all extrovert are lawyers," a classic reversal error. A universal statement can only be partly reversed to "some," never fully reversed to "all."

Only conclusion (c) survives this check, which matches option (D).

Let's summarize:

A universal statement like "All A are B" cannot be flipped into "All B are A."
A particular statement like "Some A are B" can always be flipped into "Some B are A."

The only conclusion that logically follows is (c), some extrovert are wise men, so option (D) is correct.

Answer 2

This question checks how well you apply the rules of syllogism to two statements: "All lawyers are extrovert" and "Some wise men are extrovert." Picture two circles: a small circle for lawyers sitting completely inside a bigger circle for extroverts, and a separate circle for wise men that overlaps the extrovert circle somewhere.

(a) All lawyers are wise men: the lawyer circle sits inside the extrovert circle, and the wise men circle overlaps the extrovert circle in a different, unconnected spot. Nothing forces lawyers and wise men to overlap, so this cannot be drawn.
(b) All wise men are lawyers: this would need the wise men circle to sit entirely inside the lawyer circle, but we only know wise men overlap extroverts, not lawyers directly. This is not supported.
(c) Some extrovert are wise men: "some wise men are extrovert" literally means the wise men and extrovert circles share a region. A shared region is a two way fact, so it is equally true that "some extrovert are wise men." This conclusion always holds.
(d) All extrovert are lawyers: this flips "all lawyers are extrovert" into "all extrovert are lawyers," a classic reversal error. A universal statement can only be partly reversed to "some," never fully reversed to "all."

Only conclusion (c) survives this check, which matches option (D).

Let's summarize:

A universal statement like "All A are B" cannot be flipped into "All B are A."
A particular statement like "Some A are B" can always be flipped into "Some B are A."

The only conclusion that logically follows is (c), some extrovert are wise men, so option (D) is correct.

Show Hint

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

Top Questions on Syllogisms

Questions Asked in SNAP exam