Read the following statement carefully and identify the conclusion that follows. Statement: All musicians are artists. Some artists are dancers. No dancer is blind. Conclusions: I. Some artists are not blind. II. All blind are not dancers.

Correct — B. SSC's key marks Only II follows.
Rule: a 'No' statement reads both ways: No A is B means No B is A.

'No dancer is blind' reversed is no blind person is a dancer.
That is what 'All blind are not dancers' says, so II follows.

The key credits conclusion II alone → option (b). Conclusion I is the step it does not credit; see the key note on this card.

Why the others are wrong

• (a)
  Only I follows — Only I leaves out conclusion II, which is certain: 'No dancer is blind' reversed says that no blind person is a dancer.
• (c)
  Both I and II follow — Both I and II is not what the key marks: SSC credits conclusion II alone. Whether I also follows is the point the key note on this card takes up.
• (d)
  Neither I nor II follows — Neither misses conclusion II, the direct reversal of 'No dancer is blind'. A 'No' statement always converts, so II is certain.

Conversion: 'No A is B' gives 'No B is A'. Read as 'no blind person is a dancer', conclusion II is the third statement reversed.

Some + No: 'Some A are B' with 'No B is C' gives 'Some A are not C', because the A's that are B's cannot be C's.

The first statement, 'All musicians are artists', is not needed for either conclusion.

Key facts

• 'No A is B' converts to 'No B is A'.
• 'Some A are B' with 'No B is C' gives 'Some A are not C'.
• 'Some A are B' with 'No B is C' does not give 'No A is C', because the A's outside B are unconstrained.

Common traps

• Reading 'All blind are not dancers' as a new claim instead of the third statement reversed.
• Looking for blindness in the first statement, when the second and third carry every link that matters.

No directly related past PYQ was found.