Syllogism: Statements: All horses are donkeys. All donkeys are monkeys.…

Concept: In a categorical syllogism, if all of set A are contained in set B, and all of set B are contained in set C, then transitivity guarantees all of A are contained in C. The reverse containment (all of C are within A) does not follow automatically — C may include elements from B and A but is not restricted to them.

Applying this here:

1. The first statement places horses entirely inside donkeys (all horses are donkeys).

2. The second statement places donkeys entirely inside monkeys (all donkeys are monkeys).

3. Chaining these two containments (horses within donkeys within monkeys) gives horses entirely inside monkeys, so 'all horses are monkeys' necessarily follows — inference (I) is valid.

4. Reversing the chain to get 'all monkeys are horses' would require monkeys to be entirely inside horses, but nothing in the statements restricts monkeys that way — inference (II) does not follow.

Cross-check: Picture three nested circles — horses inside donkeys inside monkeys. Every point inside the horse circle is automatically inside the monkey circle, confirming (I). But the monkey circle is the largest, so points inside it need not be inside the horse circle, confirming (II) fails.

Result: Only inference I is followed.