Supply the missing premise that makes the conclusion follow logically:P: X–some–YP: ?C: Z–some–Y
AndrewMJuly 3, 2021
Understanding this answer
I got the question correct, however I concluded “x-some-y-some-z” when I combined the premise with the conclusion. From there I realized X and Z must have an absolute relationship and set them together as X—>Z. The reverse and the negation was the correct answer for this question but did I do something improperly in terms of logic?
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.