# RE5 | x-ai/grok-4.3 | run 2

## Prompt

All roses are flowers. Some flowers fade quickly. Does it logically follow that some roses fade quickly? Explain.

## Response

No, it does not logically follow that some roses fade quickly.

The premises establish a relationship where every rose belongs to the category of flowers, yet they provide no information linking the subset of quickly fading flowers to roses specifically.

## Logical Analysis
The first premise places all roses inside the flowers category.  
The second premise asserts only an overlap between flowers and quick-fading items, without identifying which members of flowers participate in that overlap.

## Why the Conclusion Fails
These statements allow for two consistent scenarios:  
- Some roses could be among the quick-fading flowers.  
- All roses could lie outside the quick-fading group, with other flowers accounting for the "some flowers" that fade quickly.  

Nothing in the premises rules out the second scenario, so the conclusion remains unsupported.

## Formal Classification
This is an invalid syllogism known as the undistributed middle term, because the middle term "flowers" does not guarantee any connection between the subject "roses" and the predicate "fade quickly" in the required manner.

What specific change to the second premise would make the conclusion valid?
