Three statements are given followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III.

Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.

Statements:

Some tears are drops.

Some drops are streams.

All streams are rivers.

Conclusions:

I. All tears can never be rivers.

II. Some drops are rivers.

III. All tears being streams is a possibility.

To determine which of the conclusions logically follow from the given statements, we can analyze them step-by-step using Venn diagram concepts:

Step 1: Analyze the Statements

1. "Some tears are drops": This means there is a common intersection between the set of Tears and the set of Drops.
2. "Some drops are streams": This means there is a common intersection between the set of Drops and the set of Streams. Note that there is no direct relationship specified between Tears and Streams.
3. "All streams are rivers": This means the entire set of Streams lies inside the set of Rivers.

Step 2: Evaluate Conclusion I ("All tears can never be rivers")

The phrase "can never be" indicates a claim that it is impossible for all tears to be rivers. However, since all statements are affirmative and there is no negative constraint between Tears and Rivers, we can easily draw a possible Venn diagram where the set of Tears is entirely contained within the set of Rivers without violating any statements. Since it is possible, the claim that they "can never be" is incorrect. Therefore, Conclusion I does not follow.

Step 3: Evaluate Conclusion II ("Some drops are rivers")

We know from the statements that "Some drops are streams" and "All streams are rivers". Since those drops that are streams must also belong to the set of rivers (as all streams are rivers), it is guaranteed that some drops are rivers. Therefore, Conclusion II logically follows.

Step 4: Evaluate Conclusion III ("All tears being streams is a possibility")

There is no negative relationship or restriction between Tears and Streams. Therefore, we can construct a valid scenario where the entire set of Tears overlaps with or is inside the set of Streams. Since a valid Venn diagram can represent this scenario without violating any given statements, this possibility is true. Therefore, Conclusion III logically follows.

Conclusion:

Since only conclusions II and III follow, the correct option is Both II and III conclusion follow.