EXAMPLE 2.2.14
Select the statement that is a valid conclusion from the following premises, if a valid conclusion is warranted.
People who don't like cats are degenerates. All pirates own parrots. People who like cats never own parrots.
A. If you are a pirate, then you are a degenerate.
B. All degenerates own parrots.
C. All cats lick parrots.
D. None of these is warranted.
SOLUTION
Let "cats" represent "____ likes cats."
Let "degenerate" represent "____ is a degenerate."
Let "pirate" represent "_____ is a pirate."
Let "parrot" represent "______ owns a parrot."
The premise scheme as this form:

We want the first premise to begin with a symbol that appears only once. Since "pirate" appears only once, we can take the second premise and make it first.
![]()
To continue the chain of reasoning, we need to find another premise whose antecedent is "parrot." We can use the contrapositive of the original third premise:
![]()
To finish the chain of reasoning we need another premise whose antecedent is "~cat." We can use the original first premise:

Now we can form a valid argument:

In words, the valid conclusion is "If one is a pirate, then one is a degenerate." This is the same as "All pirates are degenerates." It is also the same as "If one isn't a degenerate, then one isn't a pirate." We see that choice A is correct.