Subscription pricing
I was wondering if anyone could help me out here. Always had trouble understanding this concept.
1. Say I am negating [A and B]. I know this turns to [/A or /B]. Does this or mean that BOTH A and B are out? I know it means either A is out, or B is out but can both possibly be out?
2. Conversely, if I was negating [/A and /B], I know this becomes A or B. Does this or mean that BOTH A and B could possibly be in? I know it means either A is in, or B is in, but can both possibly be in?
Not entirely sure when the "inclusive" or applies or not. Thanks a lot guys!
3
9 comments
@quinnxzhang542 Great explanation.
@7rbg180885 @quinnxzhang542 Thanks for the help, guys! Really grateful how awesome this community is.
This might be obvious, but the other instance where "or" is not inclusive is when either laws of nature or other rules/games setup preclude "both" from happening.
A is in Paris or London (definitely not both)
Game setup: There are no ties. A or B is third -->not both, because there are no ties.
To modify the answer you were given, sometimes the "or" is a de facto exclusive-or. For example, if a rule tells you that Molly finished first or fifth, you can interpret that to be an exclusive-or. This is because you know that Molly couldn't have finished both first and fifth.
However, when it's possible for both disjuncts to be true, you should interpret the "or" as an inclusive-or unless otherwise stated.
@ioana200 Got it. Thanks again!
Yes. Assume that "or" is inclusive unless explicitly stated otherwise (i.e. "not both").
@ioana200 Also, I'm assuming that the only time that "or" is not inclusive is when they specifically say "not both"? Is that a correct assumption? Or are there instances where they may not specify but the "or" is exclusive?
@ioana200 Thank you so much for the help!
"Or" in both cases is inclusive, so yes to both questions.
1.) Both could be out
2.) Both could be in