Because of the recent transformation of the market, Quore, Inc., must increase productivity 10 percent over the cours...
DalaalFebruary 23, 2020
Either/or diagrams
Why did we diagram the first sentence as "no P10% increase -> B" instead of "MT -> P10% increase or B." I first diagrammed it as "no P10% increase -> B," but when I encountered answer choice C, I doubted my approach and thought it might be the correct answer. Also, if the second approach, i.e., MT -> P10% increase or B, is the correct one, would that make answer choice D accurate as well?
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Thanks for the question! These are technically both correct ways to diagram this question, but we see once we get to answer choice (E) that the no P10% increase -> B way of diagramming it is the correct one. Even if we used the MT —> P10% v B construction, (C) would still not be the correct answer based on the logical chains. Answer choice (D) is still wrong, because we don’t know that Quore will achieve a productivity increase of 10 percent over the next two years. Why? Because it’s also possible it goes bankrupt.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any further questions that you might have.
DalaalFebruary 25, 2020
Hi @Shunhe,
I appreciate your help. Though I still do not quite understand the logic behind the two ways to diagram and how they lead to the same conclusion. How could "no P10% increase -> B" be the same as "MT -> P10% increase or B." Moreover, could you explain how answer choice C would be incorrect? Thank you.
SamAFebruary 26, 2020
Hey @Dalaal,
You should not have doubted your initial approach, because you did diagram it correctly at first:
not 10% - - - - - > BR not BR - - - - - - > 10%
Remember that we draw sufficient and necessary diagrams to represent conditionality. These are if/then statements. This is why we do not need to include market transformation in our diagram. It has already occurred. It is background information. We don't really care how Quore, Inc. got into this situation. The important thing is that they must gain 10% or else go bankrupt.
MT - - - - -> BR or 10% would read like this: If the market transforms, then Quore, Inc. will gain 10% productivity or go bankrupt, but not both.
Shunhe was ok with this because it still properly represents the "either/or" nature of bankruptcy/productivity. However, we already know that the market transformed, so there is no need to diagram it. Once you see that MT did occur, it just leaves you with (not 10% - - - - > BR)
The problem with C is that we have no idea what would occur without the market transformation. It certainly possible that Quore needed to increase productivity to some degree even before the market transformation. On must be true questions, we need to stick to the information that we have.
