Why was the "and' broken up in two different sentences?
Started by
AnnaC
· started 2019-10-01 14:34
· last activity 2019-10-01 16:24
· 1 reply
I thought that each time a sentence / premise is given with the word "and", you're supposed to lay it out in the if - then format of "A and B ---> C" but I see that this was in this example it was diagramed as follows:
A ---> C
B----> C
-
Irina
· 2019-10-01 16:24
@AnnaC,
I am assuming you are referring to the sentence "No small countries and no countries in the Southern Hemisphere have permanent seats," since this is "No" statement, a proper way to diagram it would be:
A v B -> ~ C
If it a small country or a country in SH THEN it is not on the SC
Which is logically equivalent to:
C-> ~A & ~B
IF a country is on the SC THEN it is neither a small country nor in the SC
While it is not wrong to diagram it as:
A -> ~C
B -> ~C
This notation would essentially be skipping a step and making an inference from:
A v B -> ~ C .
It is ultimately a matter of personal preference and your level of comfort with the rules of inference, I think using a compound statement form is more visually intuitive but it is not wrong to diagram it either way.
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Sign in to reply.