The author uses the word "immediacy" (line 39) most likely in order to express
QCatherine#318on August 5, 2020
Either/Or
I so I going back through to review and the statement Either/Or. When you say its impossible to have neither x nor y I completely understand. Where I get lost is that it may be possible to have x/y both exist? Please explain.
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Thanks for the question! So this is going to go into more detail then you really need to know, but if you know it you’ll definitely understand, and I think it’s pretty interesting anyway!
Basically, there are two uses of the word “or” in English (there’s some debate about this, but that would get WAY too into the details). We don’t separate between them, but practically speaking, we use it in two different ways. The first way is called the “exclusive or.” This is when we use “or” to indicate one thing or the other, but not both. For example, statements like
John either went to Los Angeles or New York.
If John didn’t go to LA, then he went to NY, and if he didn’t go to NY, then he went to LA. But did he go to both? Well, that’s not really how physics works, so no. Here, it seems as if we’re using the word “or” to exclude both possibilities from being true at the same time.
Now, the second use of the word “or” is called the “inclusive or.” Imagine you’re at a restaurant. The waiter asks the following question?
Would you like cream or sugar?
Now, you’re someone who happens to like both, so you ask for both and the waiter happily obliges. Does this seem like a weird scenario, since the waiter used the word “or”? No, not at all, this is a perfectly normal interaction! Sometimes, when people say one or the other, both are possibilities. So it’s the “inclusive or” because it can include both possibilities. Here, asking you if you want cream or sugar means do you want cream, or sugar, or even both?
On the LSAT, you can assume that the use of the word “or” is inclusive. So “or” means that at least one thing has to be chosen, but it also allows for the possibility of both things being chosen. So let’s say
Jane has apples, or Jane has bananas.
If Jane has apples AND bananas, this statement is still true. Does she have apples? Yes, so she does have apples or bananas (by virtue of having apples). Does she have bananas? Yes, so she does have apples or bananas (by virtue of having bananas). And that’s why both X and Y can exist when we make “X or Y” statements.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
