Question

If a majority of spoons are forks, then which of the following could be true? (Answer the question after reading the following paragraph.)

If a majority of spoons are forks, then which of the following could be true? (Answer the question after reading the following paragraph.)

PARAGRAPH: Aristotle, an ancient philosopher, was one of the first to discuss syllogisms. In Prior Analytics, published around 350 BCE, Aristotle outlined the basic form of syllogism which represented the earliest branch of formal logic. For Aristotle, logic revolved around deduction : “speech in which certain things having been supposed something different from those supposed results of necessity because of their being so.”
If that sounds confusing – that’s ancient philosophy for you! Let’s break it down. “The things that have been supposed” are what we now call “premises”. “What results necessarily” from those premises being true is a conclusion.
To Aristotle, if an argument was valid, it would be impossible for premises X and Y to be true and for conclusion Z to be false. Aristotle named this method of proving validity “reductio ad impossibile” : a syllogism is valid when the denial of the conclusion but acceptance of the premises would lead to a contradiction.
Aristotle divided syllogistic propositions into four different categories : universal
affirmative, particular affirmative, universal negative and particular negative. A universal affirmative syllogistic sentence : All humans need food.
A particular affirmative syllogistic sentence : Some birds can fly.
A universal negative syllogistic sentence : No dogs are cats.
A particular negative syllogistic sentence : Not all cars have four doors.
During the rise of modern formal logic, German philosopher Gottlob Frege refined Aristotle’s syllogistic theory through the addition of non-categorical syllogisms. These are syllogisms that rely on premises and can be hypothetical, or which include disjunctions like ‘or’. The hypothetical form of syllogisms can be traced back to Stoic philosophy, but modern philosophers tend to attribute the theory to Frege. In the
19th century, British philosopher and economist John Neville Keynes also helped
make non-categorical syllogisms popular.
Here’s an example of a hypothetical syllogism :
1. If it is sunny tomorrow, I can go running.
2. It is sunny.
3. Therefore, I can go running.
Here’s an example of a disjunctive syllogism :
1. Patrick studies English or Linguistics.
2. Patrick is not studying Linguistics.
3. Therefore, he is studying English.
In the Begriffsschrift (German for “Concept-Script”), he refined Aristotle’s system by developing a logical system that explained how quantifiers (words like “all” and “some”) work. His system also became the basis for modern computer science.

Option A: A majority of forks are spoons
Option B: A minority of forks are spoons
Option C: All forks are spoons
Option D: All the above.

Correct Answer

Option: d

Explanation

.

Sample Mock Tests for Practice

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1949 (PAPER – 07 Q. NO. 211 TO 245)

THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963 (PAPER 04 Q. NO. 121 TO 160)

THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 (PAPER 04 Q.NO. 121 TO 160)

RAJASTHAN LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2021

THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872 (PAPER – 04 Q. NO. 106 TO 140)

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (PAPER – 02 Q. NO. 41 TO 80)

THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 (PAPER 07 Q.NO. 241 TO 280)

THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963 (PAPER 02 Q. NO. 41 TO 80)

KERALA LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2011

GUJRAT LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2019

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (PAPER – 18 Q. NO. 681 TO 720)

G.K. PUNJABI – 01 GGSSS BNL

THE HIMACHAL PRADESH URBAN RENT CONTROL ACT, 1987 (PAPER 03 Q. NO. 61 TO 90)

THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (PAPER 01 Q. NO. 1 TO 19)

THE MUSLIM PERSONAL LAWS (PAPER 01 Q. NO. 1 TO 29)

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (PAPER – 20 Q. NO. 761 TO 800)

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1949 (PAPER – 08 Q. NO. 246 TO 280)

THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 (PAPER 09 Q.NO. 321 TO 345)

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (PAPER – 06 Q. NO. 201 TO 240)

G.K. ENGLISH -02 GGSSS BNL

THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2000 (PAPER 01 Q. NO. 1 TO 13)

MADHYA PARDESH LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2019

THE CHHATTISGARH EXCISE ACT, 1915 (PAPER 01 Q. NO. 1 TO 8)

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (PAPER – 17 Q. NO. 641 TO 680)

ODISHA LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2011

UTTAR PARDESH LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES LAW EXAM 2018

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 (PAPER – 21 Q. NO. 801 TO 840)

DELHI LOWER JUDICIARY 2008

RAJASTHAN LOWER JUDICIAL SERVICES 2011

THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 (PAPER – 05 Q. NO. 141 TO 175)

THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 (PAPER – 18 Q. NO. 681 TO 720)

THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 (PAPER – 04 Q. NO. 106 TO 140)