Based on the passage, it can be concluded that the author and Broyles-González hold essentially the same attitude toward
josephon December 10, 2017
again conditionals
there are a lots of conditional indicators in the last example as there are quantifiers. why did we or why are we not able to diagram any conditional for the question?
5 Replies
Mehranon February 10, 2018
Because of the quantifiers that also appear in these statements which takes them out of the S & N realm.
For example, "Only a few always do their own research before investing."
While this does have "only" it is not a S & N statement due to the presence of "few."
Hope that helps!
Roberton May 29, 2019
Hey, so I can get all the contrapostives from the drill practice I can get the premise contrapostives and the conclusion contrapostibes but I still don't know how to get the missing premise ?
example
d ->a
c->d
missing premise ? comes from where
Not x->a
Ravion May 30, 2019
@sigmajonez14,
Great question. Let's take a look.
D - >A (not A - >not D) C - >D (not D - >not C) : Conclusion: Not X - >A (not A - >X)
We need to add a premise that allows us to chain everything up.
not A - >not D - >not C
We need to go from not A - >X, so if we add not C - >X, we can arrive at our conclusion.
The missing premise is not C - >X (not X - >C).
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any questions!
Roberton May 30, 2019
on the missing premise do we just put in X
from the contrapostives could it be not a ->not d->not c->x
basically you are just working from the contrapostives and trying to link the first cp with the last and link them
Ravion May 31, 2019
@sigmajonez14, right. We look at the original and the contrapositive for each premise and the conclusion and figure out how to best chain it all together.
