@pbahoura It's a bad thing. Because you are not "reversing and negating". The right negation ould be to flip "deer" to the SUFF and negate that, and then make the "hunting permitted" into the necessary condition and negate that.
So it should look like this:
/Deer Pop --> /Hunting Permitted.
The reason for this is that not doing X, or negating the sufficient, does not guarantee that you will NOT do the necessary.
Think about it like this: Driving a car guarantees that at bare minimum you are going somewhere.
Driving is the subset of going somewhere.
Now negate "driving". Does NOT driving guarantee that you are NOT going somewehre? NO. Because you can take an Uber, or you can have a friend drive you.
For me, any time I see a Sufficient negation I say "Necessary is wild" meaning, anything can happen. Negating the SUFF simply means the necessary condition can do whatever because nothing guarantees it anymore.
Question 1, does "where hunting is permitted" not act as a complete modifier for "In surrounding counties?"
I answered "surrounding counties -> /(deer population increases" and vice versa with the contrapositive since I assumed "where hunting is permitted" applied to ALL surrounding counties. Not that it is pointing out a subset of surrounding counties. How are we supposed to tell the difference?
For 4, if ur tryna fly by putting on a racc suit, you better be an Italian Plumber! Even some of the Italian Plumbers in Racc suits may be unable to fly.
@jaydenca If you mean that you did not include them in what ever phrase or acronym you used I think that is fine; my understanding is that we have a fast simple system to place these complex claims into a IF THEN statement ... and drawwing that arrow is what will cemend that into your mind... For a lot of my answers I did not include everything ... for 5 I said "cruise ship stop U" --> NSAP and then its contrapositive
For #5, I did the set A and set B diagram for it, but I have a quick question about it: Is the reason why safety concerns do not force unscheduled stops because there are other reasons on their own that could cause an unscheduled stop, or other reasons IN ADDITION (i.e. multiple things wrong at once) to the safety concerns that force the unscheduled stop?
Can someone please explain why for 4,5 we are not putting the clause after the conditional indicator before the arrow during the step 1 translation ? Isn't that the rule?
@Noor2000 ”Only” and “Only when” are necessary condition indicators, meaning the clause following these indicators would go on the right side of the arrow, not the left.
@alisha.2k3 "Only" is a necessary condition indicator, so whatever immediately follows the word "only" becomes the necessary condition.
In this sentence: Only Italian plumbers can fly while wearing raccoon suits. "Italian plumbers" comes directly after "only," so it is the necessary condition:
can fly while wearing raccoon suits → Italian plumber
The reason your translation doesn't work is that it treats "wearing a raccoon suit" by itself as the sufficient condition. But the sentence is not saying that merely wearing a raccoon suit tells us someone is an Italian plumber.
The sufficient condition is the entire activity of being able to fly while wearing a raccoon suit. Anyone who satisfies that entire condition must be an Italian plumber.
Something seems to not be clicking for me here. The last few skill builders I have been super confident but consistently missing 1 or 2 questions and not understanding why. I get its depending on sufficiency vs necessity conceptually but I'm just not seeing it when I go and do the practices for some reason. Its so obvious when watching the videos but I keep slipping up when I actually try.
finished number 5 and accidentally clicked for the correct answer to number 4. was soooooo confused when my answer about unscheduled cruise ships was wrong based on the grounds of italian plumbers
I noticed that I flip the sentences around. Am I making a mistake recognizing Sufficient and Necessary? Each question I noticed I got the order convoluted.
@Daniel.p3raza I think your problem is that you are confusing necessary and sufficient indicators. I would recommend just memorizing the trigger words since not all of them are intuitive.
Sufficient: if, where, when, every, all, any, the only
Necessary: only, only if, only when, only where, always, must
@Daniel.p3raza i'd recommend slowing down a bit! esp while i'm still learning i'm making sure to think of examples for each option and/or switching it to an if/then statement. so, for example, number 4 would either be "If you are an italian plumber, then you can fly while wearing a raccoon suit" or "if you can fly while wearing a raccoon suit, then you are an italian plumber." In this case, the second would be correct, because some italian plumbers (i.e. mario and luigi) can surely fly while wearing raccoon suits, but not all italian plumbers can fly while wearing raccoon suits. the second option clarifies that "only" portion of the conditional
These can be weir for me at times. I have the same general format wherein the answer I give has the same overall format of the instructors. but I just wrote it a lil different. It had me questioning if I'm wrong. But I suppose not.
Example:
My answer for # 1: hunting is permitted -> deer population has not increased
/size of the deer population has not increased in the last eight years -> /hunting is permitted
Provided answer for #1: hunting is permitted → /(deer population increased in last eight years)
deer population increased in last eight years → /(hunting is permitted)
My answer for #3: VMJ -> formed on the basis of its consequences.
/formed on the basis of its consequences -> /VMJ
Provided answer for #3: valid moral judgment about a particular action → formed on the basis of action's consequences
/(formed on the basis of action's consequences) → /(valid moral judgment about a particular action)
@ChelseaSwaby03 to reveal the equivalent logic inherent in the sentence. It will help us understand the sufficient/necessary components better when answering questions and eliminating wrong answer choices that confuse the sufficient for necessary and necessary for sufficient.
@Hanifa i also find this to be rather frustrating. I would like to build upon the skills just learned, not be tricked into realizing it's an old skill. I get the test will be tricky on purpose, but why make the skill building tricky for a concept just introduced?
i'm returning to these lessons again and I kept messing up #2. I group [planetary society will be endangered] at sufficient then [impacts from space] as necessary:
PSE --> IFS
/IFS --> /PSE
"If there are no impacts from space, then planetary society is not endangered"
but the CORRECT answer is sufficient clause is JUST [planetary society] and then necessary is the rest of the sentence.
PS --> EbIFS
/EbIFS --> /PS
"If it is not endangered by impacts from space, then it is not a planetary society"
I'm neglecting to "strip" the sentence first, I think?Because at it's base the sentence is "society will be endangered", where it is much easier to see okay WHAT type of society, and WHAT type of endangerment--those are the two concepts with tension.
@Cee🦋 I realized the same thing for msyelf. It's important to go back to your note/ earlier in the less where it says The idea immediately following the logical indicator is the necessary condition or he idea immediately following the logical indicator is the sufficient condition. I was getting confused why i was getting it wrong to until I noticed him breaking it down this way. I think they should provide an addtional video in terms of how to solve it/break it down the way he explains it which is more effective visually. That's why he adds 1 or 2 above those indicators.
171 comments
4/5 ! Getting better! #4 got me. Guess I'm not a Italian plumber
trying to stay motivated today, if anyone else has been extremely unmotivated i feel you and we will persevere lol
Felt good about stuff leading to this lesson. now, not so much. I keep reversing the order.
So like for question 1, I put my lawgic as
hunting permitted -> deer pop has not increased in last 8 years
/hunting permitted -> /deer pop has not increased in last 8 years
Like I'm basically just making the second statement a double negative. Is that a bad thing, or am I fine doing that
@pbahoura It's a bad thing. Because you are not "reversing and negating". The right negation ould be to flip "deer" to the SUFF and negate that, and then make the "hunting permitted" into the necessary condition and negate that.
So it should look like this:
/Deer Pop --> /Hunting Permitted.
The reason for this is that not doing X, or negating the sufficient, does not guarantee that you will NOT do the necessary.
Think about it like this: Driving a car guarantees that at bare minimum you are going somewhere.
Driving is the subset of going somewhere.
Now negate "driving". Does NOT driving guarantee that you are NOT going somewehre? NO. Because you can take an Uber, or you can have a friend drive you.
For me, any time I see a Sufficient negation I say "Necessary is wild" meaning, anything can happen. Negating the SUFF simply means the necessary condition can do whatever because nothing guarantees it anymore.
5/5!
5/5 LETS GO
Question 1, does "where hunting is permitted" not act as a complete modifier for "In surrounding counties?"
I answered "surrounding counties -> /(deer population increases" and vice versa with the contrapositive since I assumed "where hunting is permitted" applied to ALL surrounding counties. Not that it is pointing out a subset of surrounding counties. How are we supposed to tell the difference?
For 4, if ur tryna fly by putting on a racc suit, you better be an Italian Plumber! Even some of the Italian Plumbers in Racc suits may be unable to fly.
5/5 AYEEEEEE
I confused including introductory modifiers in #1 like, "In surrounding counties..." into the Lawgic translation for some reason.
@jaydenca If you mean that you did not include them in what ever phrase or acronym you used I think that is fine; my understanding is that we have a fast simple system to place these complex claims into a IF THEN statement ... and drawwing that arrow is what will cemend that into your mind... For a lot of my answers I did not include everything ... for 5 I said "cruise ship stop U" --> NSAP and then its contrapositive
For #5, I did the set A and set B diagram for it, but I have a quick question about it: Is the reason why safety concerns do not force unscheduled stops because there are other reasons on their own that could cause an unscheduled stop, or other reasons IN ADDITION (i.e. multiple things wrong at once) to the safety concerns that force the unscheduled stop?
Can someone please explain why for 4,5 we are not putting the clause after the conditional indicator before the arrow during the step 1 translation ? Isn't that the rule?
@Noor2000 ”Only” and “Only when” are necessary condition indicators, meaning the clause following these indicators would go on the right side of the arrow, not the left.
For #4, does anyone know why it wasn't:
wearing a raccoon suit → Italian plumbers can fly
Contrapositive: /(Italian plumbers can fly) → /(wearing a raccoon suit)
If an Italian plumber can not fly, they are not wearing a raccoon suit.
I understand that this is not the answer but I don't understand the mechanistic reason behind this.
@alisha.2k3 "Only" is a necessary condition indicator, so whatever immediately follows the word "only" becomes the necessary condition.
In this sentence: Only Italian plumbers can fly while wearing raccoon suits. "Italian plumbers" comes directly after "only," so it is the necessary condition:
can fly while wearing raccoon suits → Italian plumber
The reason your translation doesn't work is that it treats "wearing a raccoon suit" by itself as the sufficient condition. But the sentence is not saying that merely wearing a raccoon suit tells us someone is an Italian plumber.
The sufficient condition is the entire activity of being able to fly while wearing a raccoon suit. Anyone who satisfies that entire condition must be an Italian plumber.
#4 and #5 ahhhhh
Something seems to not be clicking for me here. The last few skill builders I have been super confident but consistently missing 1 or 2 questions and not understanding why. I get its depending on sufficiency vs necessity conceptually but I'm just not seeing it when I go and do the practices for some reason. Its so obvious when watching the videos but I keep slipping up when I actually try.
@BenjaminMcDaniel Im with you. I think my mix up is coming from realizing order of sufficient/necessary
Would it be best to try and memorize the group 2 indicator words to make questions like #5 easier?
For #2, what would be the English translation of the contrapositive: /(endangered by impacts from space) → /(planetary society)
I got tripped up on #5 because I read when and figured that only was irrelevant since when is a indicator for sufficiency so I flipped them
@MGonz6 I saw that "only when" and had to do a double take lol
finished number 5 and accidentally clicked for the correct answer to number 4. was soooooo confused when my answer about unscheduled cruise ships was wrong based on the grounds of italian plumbers
I noticed that I flip the sentences around. Am I making a mistake recognizing Sufficient and Necessary? Each question I noticed I got the order convoluted.
@Daniel.p3raza I think your problem is that you are confusing necessary and sufficient indicators. I would recommend just memorizing the trigger words since not all of them are intuitive.
Sufficient: if, where, when, every, all, any, the only
Necessary: only, only if, only when, only where, always, must
@Daniel.p3raza i'd recommend slowing down a bit! esp while i'm still learning i'm making sure to think of examples for each option and/or switching it to an if/then statement. so, for example, number 4 would either be "If you are an italian plumber, then you can fly while wearing a raccoon suit" or "if you can fly while wearing a raccoon suit, then you are an italian plumber." In this case, the second would be correct, because some italian plumbers (i.e. mario and luigi) can surely fly while wearing raccoon suits, but not all italian plumbers can fly while wearing raccoon suits. the second option clarifies that "only" portion of the conditional
These can be weir for me at times. I have the same general format wherein the answer I give has the same overall format of the instructors. but I just wrote it a lil different. It had me questioning if I'm wrong. But I suppose not.
Example:
My answer for # 1: hunting is permitted -> deer population has not increased
/size of the deer population has not increased in the last eight years -> /hunting is permitted
Provided answer for #1: hunting is permitted → /(deer population increased in last eight years)
deer population increased in last eight years → /(hunting is permitted)
My answer for #3: VMJ -> formed on the basis of its consequences.
/formed on the basis of its consequences -> /VMJ
Provided answer for #3: valid moral judgment about a particular action → formed on the basis of action's consequences
/(formed on the basis of action's consequences) → /(valid moral judgment about a particular action)
I'm understanding how to do them but i'm not understanding why. Why do they switch around when it comes to putting the negation?
@ChelseaSwaby03 to reveal the equivalent logic inherent in the sentence. It will help us understand the sufficient/necessary components better when answering questions and eliminating wrong answer choices that confuse the sufficient for necessary and necessary for sufficient.
@NinaA Thank you!
Why does the title say " Skill Builder - Group 2 Translations 3" while the questions have a mix of both Group 1 & 2 indicators?
@Hanifa i also find this to be rather frustrating. I would like to build upon the skills just learned, not be tricked into realizing it's an old skill. I get the test will be tricky on purpose, but why make the skill building tricky for a concept just introduced?
i'm returning to these lessons again and I kept messing up #2. I group [planetary society will be endangered] at sufficient then [impacts from space] as necessary:
PSE --> IFS
/IFS --> /PSE
"If there are no impacts from space, then planetary society is not endangered"
but the CORRECT answer is sufficient clause is JUST [planetary society] and then necessary is the rest of the sentence.
PS --> EbIFS
/EbIFS --> /PS
"If it is not endangered by impacts from space, then it is not a planetary society"
I'm neglecting to "strip" the sentence first, I think?Because at it's base the sentence is "society will be endangered", where it is much easier to see okay WHAT type of society, and WHAT type of endangerment--those are the two concepts with tension.
#Help
Been getting them all correct so far until I got to #4 in this skill builder. I put:
IP WRS --> IP can fly
/(IP can fly) --> /(IP WRS)
IP = Italian Plumber
WRS = Wearing Raccoon Suit
Is this completely incorrect? How can I avoid making this mistake in the future when I come across similarly structured conditional statements?
@Cee🦋 I realized the same thing for msyelf. It's important to go back to your note/ earlier in the less where it says The idea immediately following the logical indicator is the necessary condition or he idea immediately following the logical indicator is the sufficient condition. I was getting confused why i was getting it wrong to until I noticed him breaking it down this way. I think they should provide an addtional video in terms of how to solve it/break it down the way he explains it which is more effective visually. That's why he adds 1 or 2 above those indicators.