Question

A. All roses are fragrant.
B. All roses are majestic.
C. All roses are plants.
D. All plants need air.
E. All roses need air.
F. All plants need water.

• A. ABC
• B. BCD
• C. CDE
• D. CEF

Hint:

Look for hierarchical chains like "A is a type of B", then "B has a property", which lets you infer "A has that property" — this helps eliminate distractor options.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Let's examine option (c): CDE Statement C: All roses are plants.
Statement D: All plants need air.
Statement E: All roses need air.
From C, we know roses are a subset of plants.
From D, all plants need air. Since roses are plants, we can logically deduce E: all roses need air.
This forms a clear chain of reasoning: \[ \text{Roses} \Rightarrow \text{Plants} \Rightarrow \text{Need air} \Rightarrow \text{Roses need air} \] This is logically tight and directly inferential. Now let’s test other options for logical relation: Option (a) ABC: - These are just three general characteristics of roses (fragrant, majestic, plants), but they don’t logically follow from each other. - No causal or hierarchical connection. Option (b) BCD: - B and C describe roses, but D introduces “plants need air,” which does not directly relate back to B (majestic) or connect all three. Option (d) CEF: - C: All roses are plants.
- E: All roses need air.
- F: All plants need water.
This contains valid facts, but E (roses need air) does not follow directly from F (plants need water).
There is no logical bridge like in CDE. Conclusion: Only CDE contains a clear progression of logic — from class inclusion to a shared property.