Correct
Not quite — the correct answer is highlighted
Show answer & explanationHide answer
Answer: (D) Conclusions II and III follow
Explanation
The statements can be analyzed using set theory where Squirrels (S) is a subset of Lizards (L), and Lizards (L) is a subset of Goose (G). This relationship can be expressed as S ⊂ L ⊂ G.
Conclusion II follows because the statement All squirrels are lizards implies that the set of squirrels is contained within the set of lizards. In syllogistic logic, the universal affirmative statement All A are B implies the particular affirmative statement Some B are A. Therefore, some lizards are squirrels is a valid logical derivation.
Conclusion III follows through the property of transitivity. If all squirrels are lizards and all lizards are goose, then all squirrels are goose (S ⊂ G). Just as with the previous conclusion, if all squirrels are goose, it logically necessitates that some goose are squirrels. Thus, both conclusions II and III are logically sound based on the given premises.