Diagramming the Stimulus

@Julie, Exactly the same way as the conclusion: ~SU -> ~UO This question is a great example of a circular reasoning flaw, where the conclusion simply restates one of the premises.

Thank you for clarifying that Irina! I think when I was doing the problem I forgot whether "without" introduced nec. or suf.

@Julie-V, happy to hear Irina's answer clarified things! Let us know if you have any other questions!

I still do not understand the diagramming for the without section of the sentence. I see the conclusion as not SU => not UO. For the without part I see, "UO => SU". To me that looks exactly like the contrapositive. In that case, is that the reason why it would be considered circular reasoning?

Hi @camcani, Exactly! As Irina said, the conclusion restates one of the premises, making this a circular reasoning flaw. Your diagrams are correct.

I still don't understand the "without" part. I thought without introduce a necessary condition with would be diagramed as not UO => SU.

I think it's important to understand the whole meaning of the Sentence or clause. Here we are told that without understanding oneself one can't understand others. What does this guarantee? We know that someone who doesn't understand themself can't understand others. That is, if not understand self, then not understand others. The contrapositive would thus be if understand others, then understand oneself.

Got it, Thank you!!