Question

Given statements:
1. Some students love reading.
2. Some adults do not love reading.
3. Some students are not adult.
4. Some students are adult.
5. No reading lover is an adult.
6. Some men do not love reading.
The set of statements is: 
 

• A. 1, 3, 4
• B. 1, 5, 3
• C. 1, 2, 4
• D. 6, 2, 4

Hint:

When matching a set of statements, look for consistent categories (e.g., all three involve “students”, “adults”, and “reading lovers” in a compatible way). Avoid options with unrelated subject classes.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Identify the common term across a candidate set of three statements; here "reading lover" links statements 1 and 5.

Step 2: Apply the standard rule: "Some A are B" plus "No B is C" logically gives "Some A are not C". With A = students, B = reading lovers, C = adults, statements 1 and 5 combine to give exactly statement 3.

Step 3: Check the remaining option sets (1,3,4 / 1,2,4 / 6,2,4) for the same pattern; none of them share a middle term that lets two statements derive the third.

Conclusion: The valid set is 1, 5, 3.

Answer 2

Classical logic recognises specific valid patterns for combining two premises into a conclusion, one of which takes a universal negative premise together with a particular affirmative premise to produce a particular negative conclusion. Let's check each option against this specific pattern:

1. 1, 3, 4: None of these three statements is a universal, "All" or "No", statement at all, they are all particular "Some" statements, so this set cannot fit a pattern that requires a universal premise.
2. 1, 5, 3: Statement 5, "No reading lover is an adult," is a universal negative. Statement 1, "Some students love reading," is a particular affirmative sharing the middle term "reading lover" with statement 5. Combining a universal negative with a particular affirmative sharing a middle term validly yields a particular negative conclusion, "Some students are not adult," which is exactly statement 3. This set fits the recognised valid pattern precisely.
3. 1, 2, 4: Statement 2 is a particular negative, not a universal statement, so the specific universal-plus-particular pattern cannot apply here, and there is no shared middle term connecting all three into one valid inference either.
4. 6, 2, 4: None of these are universal statements, and the three involve three different unconnected groups, men, adults, students, so no valid inference pattern links them.

Only the second option fits the recognised valid pattern of combining a universal negative premise with a particular affirmative premise sharing a common middle term to reach a particular negative conclusion.

Therefore, the correct answer is 1, 5, 3.