All judges are lawyers. Some lawyers are not eloquent. Therefore,
AAll judges are eloquent
BNo lawyers are eloquent
CNo judges are eloquent
DSome judges may not be eloquent — but the syllogism does not entail this conclusion either; the premises are insufficient to conclude anything about judges' eloquence as a class
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: D. Some judges may not be eloquent — but the syllogism does not entail this conclusion either; the premises are insufficient to conclude anything about judges' eloquence as a class
From 'All J are L' and 'Some L are not E', we cannot conclude 'No J are E' or 'All J are E'. We also cannot validly conclude 'Some J are not E' (those non-eloquent lawyers may or may not be judges). Premises are insufficient.
Related questions
A person buys 3 books at Rs 240, Rs 320 and Rs 400. The average price per book is'If it rains, the match is cancelled. The match was not cancelled.' Which valid conclusionIdentify the antonym of 'concur':Identify the word that means 'a person who breaks the law':Under the Constitution, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India is appointed byFundamental Duties of citizens are listed inDirective Principles of State Policy areFundamental Rights are enshrined in