A shop sign reads: "Some of our sweets are sugar-free." Ishani concludes from this that…
A shop sign reads: "Some of our sweets are sugar-free." Ishani concludes from this that "some of the sweets are not sugar-free." Her friend says that does not necessarily follow. Who is right?
Who do you think is right? Pick one.
The answer: Her friend is right, "some are sugar-free" does not prove that some are not
Why
Ishani is using 'some' the way it often works in everyday speech, where saying 'some' hints that not all. But as a plain statement of fact, 'some of our sweets are sugar-free' only promises that AT LEAST ONE is; it does not rule out that ALL of them are. The shop could have made its whole tray sugar-free and still put up that sign without lying. Test: imagine the shopkeeper instead says 'some of these sweets contain sugar', and then you find that every single one does — was the shopkeeper lying? No, because 'some' was still satisfied. The same logic applies to the sugar-free sign. Her friend is right: 'some are' leaves open whether the rest are or are not — to know that some are NOT sugar-free you would need that stated separately, or you would have to check.
On Socho, you explain your thinking out loud and a coach asks about YOUR reasoning — one question a day, free, in Hindi, Hinglish or English.
Try a question on Socho →More disagreements in Syllogisms & Formal Logic