Statement 1 all cups are bottles. 2 some bottles are jugs. 3 no jug is a plate. 4 some plates are tables. Conclusion A. some tables are bottles. B. no table is bottle. C. Either of conclusions follow ( A and B) D. Neither A and B E. Both follows
How do we solve these types of questions? How do we frame the Venn diagrams?
These are linked Aristotelian syllogisms, so it's helpful to understand distribution (a term is "distributed" if you've talked about every object described by the term), and the fallacies associated with distribution (undistributed middle, illicit major and minor), along with the rules about negative statements (Some A are not B is negative, as is No A are B; All A are B is positive, as is Some A are B): for a standard three-statement syllogism, the number of negative premisses must equal the number of negative conclusions. This can allow you to simplify the supposed links in the middle of this sort of chain.
For example, take the first two statements. You've got an A, and an I. Both are positive, so the intermediate conclusion must be positive. You've distributed the term "cups", but no other terms. But "cups" is not the middle term, so you've already got the fallacy of the undistributed middle. You can go no further with this chain: there will be no valid conclusions.
But, just to illustrate further, let's reduce the second two terms to see if there's a valid reduction there. We've got Some B are J, and No J are P. J is the middle term, and it's distributed, which is good. The conclusion has to be negative. Since B is not distributed, but P is, you have to have an O statement as the conclusion. An O statement distributes the predicate, so you'd have to have Some B are not P. (All the EIO figures are valid). So our list of statements now is this: 1. All C are B. 2-3. Some B are not P. 4. Some P are T.
Now let's examine how we can combine our 2-3 statement with the 4 statement. We've got one positive, one negative premiss. The 2-3 distributes P, so that'll need to be distributed in the conclusion. Problem is, although the middle term is distributed, there's no way to have an undistributed term in a negative conclusion. So these can't be combined.
You can do Venn diagrams with Aristotelian syllogisms, but linking them up gets tricky fast. I wouldn't do more than a three-term Venn diagram. The tool gets unwieldy even for four terms.