Question #1021

argument mapping

Started by sangagul1234ah@gmail.com · started 2021-01-12 17:58 · last activity 2021-03-17 03:34 · 2 replies

I had mapped out my first sentence as (MT --> ^P10% or B) I still got the right answer, and my transitive chain for E was still the same as the video, but my thinking was since it is not the 10% increase b/c of not having 20%, then it is Bankruptcy because that was the only other choice in my setup. I want to know if my think was logical and if this won't become a problem in the future.

Replies

shunhe · 2021-01-13 22:20

Hi @sangagul1234ah@gmail.com, Thanks for the question! That’s not quite how you would diagram the first sentence. I’m not sure what “MT” is, though my guess is that it means “market transformation”? So what you diagrammed says “if the market transforms, Quore must increase productivity 10% or it’ll go bankrupt.” That’s pretty close, but it’s not “if the market transforms,” it’s “because the market has already transformed.” So you could just write Inc prod 10% v Bankrupt where the “v” is shorthand for “or.” No conditional logic needed there. Then you’d diagram the second sentence. I’m not 100% following your logic in what you diagrammed, but it seems like you ended up getting lucky. Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
Ashe · 2021-03-17 03:34

Why is it NOT increase productivity 10% -----> Bankrupt and not "increase productivity 10% -----> NOT bankrupt"? When we have "No or Not", don't we negate the necessary conditional? In those question isn't it as If had a "NOT" before the increase productivity 10% (even if its not write the NOT)? Thank you. :).