At least on an intuitive level, the propositions seem paradoxical because there's a piece missing. After all, we know that from a distance, it can be hard to t

At least on an intuitive level, the propositions seem paradoxical because there's a piece missing. After all, we know that from a distance, it can be hard to tell if it's a raven or a crow. I'd put it this way: 1. All ravens are black. 2. Non-black things are not ravens. 3. Not every black thing is a raven. With the addition of the third statement, it appears all cases are covered. But maybe that's too simple, or could be I'm not understanding something...