Logical Deduction Logical Deduction - Section 1

The first premise is A type and distributes the subject. So, the middle term 'waters' which forms its predicate, is not distributed. The second premise is I type and does not distribute either subject or predicate. So, the middle term 'waters' forming its subject is not distributed. Since the middle term is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows.

Since both the premises are universal and one premise is negative, the conclusion must be universal negative. So, neither I nor II follows.

'Every' is equivalent to 'All'. Thus, since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, I follows. II is the converse of the second premise and thus it also holds.

As discussed above, the conclusion must be universal negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'No flower is fruit'. I is the converse of this conclusion and thus it follows. II is the converse of the first premise and so it also holds.

Since both the premises are negative, no definite conclusion follows.

Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows.

Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular. So, neither I nor II follows.

Since one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative. So, neither conclusion follows.

Since the middle term 'cakes' is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows. However, I and II involve only the extreme terms and form a complementary pair. So, either I or II follows.

Clearly, the conclusion must be universal negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'No mango is cheap'. Since all mangoes are golden in colour, we may substitute 'mangoes' with 'golden-coloured mangoes'. Thus, II follows.