Critical Reasoning

All actors are exuberant people and all exuberant people are extroverts, but nevertheless it is true that some shy people are actors.
If the statements above are true, each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:

(A) Some shy people are extroverts.
(B) Some shy extroverts are not actors.
(C) Some exuberant people who are actors are shy.
(D) All people who are not extroverts are not actors.
(E) Some extroverts are shy

IMO B

would go with C

all actors=exuberant
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

C says some actors are shy. contradicts the stimulus.

scoobydooby wrote:would go with C

all actors=exuberant
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

C says some actors are shy. contradicts the stimulus.

Hi Sciobydooby

How did you derive this ? :
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

IMO B

Please give reasonings.

madhur_ahuja wrote:

scoobydooby wrote:would go with C

all actors=exuberant
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

C says some actors are shy. contradicts the stimulus.

Hi Sciobydooby

How did you derive this ? :
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

yes right, it doesnt quite work. i had missed out on "some shy are actors"
i tried using sets, i seem to get C again

attaching the diagram

scoobydooby wrote:

madhur_ahuja wrote:

scoobydooby wrote:would go with C

all actors=exuberant
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

C says some actors are shy. contradicts the stimulus.

Hi Sciobydooby

How did you derive this ? :
all exuberant=extrovert (not shy)
=>all actors are non shy

yes right, it doesnt quite work. i had missed out on "some shy are actors"
i tried using sets, i seem to get C again

attaching the diagram

According to your diagram, C should be TRUE since there is an overlap on exuberant, actors and shy.

Anyway, I don't think representation of shy is correct in the diagram.

OA is B and this is due to process of elimination. You cannot prove B but every other option can be proved by the premises present in the argument.

i should just guess on such questions
real2008 and italian7745, please share your thoughts/reasoning on B.

What about D?

All Actors --> Exuberants
All Exuberant --> Extroverts

Some Shy --> Actors
Some Shy who are actors --> Exuberants --> Extroverts

So, I eliminated (A), (B), (E).
I am left with (C) and (D).
I could also eliminate (C).

(D) is stating the opposite of the given data, i.e. All Non-Extroverts --> Not Actors?

I could be wrong, please correct me if i am so. Thank you.

shark wrote:What about D?


(D) is stating the opposite of the given data, i.e. All Non-Extroverts --> Not Actors?

.

This is what . D is too extreme, something you cannot say will hold true or not, since it is not stated in the passage.

madhur_ahuja wrote:All actors are exuberant people and all exuberant people are extroverts, but nevertheless it is true that some shy people are actors.
If the statements above are true, each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:

(A) Some shy people are extroverts.
(B) Some shy extroverts are not actors.
(C) Some exuberant people who are actors are shy.
(D) All people who are not extroverts are not actors.
(E) Some extroverts are shy

Please see attached the file. As per statement B, the red zone has to necessarily exist. But consider the only zone (i.e. shy people zone) with green and blue color and no red color and this holds the given condition in question. mind the qn is 'must be type'.

In my opinion B is the most logical one.