Need help understanding

@femon90 sure! Let's break down the stimulus first. "Not surprisingly, there are no professors under the age of eighteen." P ==> >18 <18 ==> not P "And, as well known, no one under eighteen can vote legally." <18 ==> not VL VL ==> >18 "Finally, some brilliant people are professors, . . . BP-some-P some are legal voters, . . . BP-some-VL and some are under eighteen." BP-some-<18 Notice, this last statement, i.e. "some [brilliant people] are under eighteen," when combined with the first and second sentences allows us to conclude that (E) must be true. BP-some-<18 ==> not P BP-some-not P BP-some-<18 ==> not VL BP-some-not VL If you wondering why we can conclude "neither professors nor legal voters", remember that you can rewrite the first and second principles as follows: <18 ==> not P & not VL So you would then combine as follow: BP-some-<18 ==> not P & not VL To conclude: BP-some-not P & not VL Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.