I am still getting confused about if GP-> GL can deduce GL-some-GP, then why is it not right to logically deduce that GL-some-not GP. Could you explain in a little more detail why just because some are, doesn't mean that some aren't?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
We know for a fact that 100 of the GLs are also GPs This is why we can deduce that GL - some - GP
The reason we can't conclude that GL - some - not GP is because "some" means at least one and up to all. It's possible that All GPs are also GLs; we don't have enough information to conclude that some GLs are for sure not GPs, so this is why we can't conclude that. We just know that some are, and as mentioned, some means at least one and up to and including all. For more information, check out our video lessons on quantifiers, as they will help you to better familiarize yourself with the terms.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any questions!
