Home › CLAT (NLU Prep) › logicalreasoning › logical_reasoning › Statement A: All lawyers are educated. Statement…
Statement A: All lawyers are educated. Statement B: Some educated people are not lawyers. Statement C: Therefore, some lawyers are not educated. Which is the BEST critique?
AThe argument is inductively strong
BThe argument is valid because A and B are consistent
CThe conclusion does not follow from A; A entails that ALL lawyers are educated, so 'some lawyers are not educated' contradicts A and cannot be inferred
DThe conclusion follows by modus tollens
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: C. The conclusion does not follow from A; A entails that ALL lawyers are educated, so 'some lawyers are not educated' contradicts A and cannot be inferred
Categorical syllogism analysis: A: All L are E. The conclusion 'Some L are not E' directly contradicts A. Statement B about 'some E are not L' tells us about non-lawyers who are educated and is irrelevant to whether all lawyers are educated.
Related questions
Consider: 'Every student in the class scored above average. Therefore, the class average mIn the analogy 'Doctor : Hospital :: Judge : ____', the BEST completion isA speaker argues: 'My opponent claims we should reduce defence spending. So my opponent waConsider: 'No reptiles are warm-blooded. Some snakes are reptiles. Therefore, no snakes arA passage argues that mandatory voting should be introduced because 'democracy means rule Argument: 'God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is the word of God.'
This aPremise: Either the doors were locked, or someone heard the alarm. The doors were NOT lockPassage: 'The crime rate fell by 12% the year after the new law was passed. Hence the new