2 comments

  • Monday, May 07 2018

    @hbochjk116 said:

    Stim: without trust there cannot be meaningful emotional connection to another human being

    H: Happiness, MEC: meaningful emotional connection, I: isolated

    Premise 1: Because there is a group 3 and a group 4 indicator I would have to treat one as a negation. I'm going for the group 3 translation (without) and using the group 4 indicator (no) as the negation: T --> MEC

    "Without" signifies necessary condition and negates the sufficient condition. So Premise 1 should be translated as "MEC -> T" ("without trust there cannot be meaningful emotional connection to another human being").

    With the corrected premise, the argument would look something like this:

    P1: MEC -> T

    P2: ~I -> MEC

    C: H -> T

    The missing premise would be "H -> ~I," whose contrapositive is answer choice (A).

    There's a forum rule against posting direct quotes from PTs, by the way.

    Thank you for clearing it up for me, and my mistake on the post.

    0
  • Sunday, May 06 2018

    Stim: without trust there cannot be meaningful emotional connection to another human being

    H: Happiness, MEC: meaningful emotional connection, I: isolated

    Premise 1: Because there is a group 3 and a group 4 indicator I would have to treat one as a negation. I'm going for the group 3 translation (without) and using the group 4 indicator (no) as the negation: T --> MEC

    "Without" signifies necessary condition and negates the sufficient condition. So Premise 1 should be translated as "MEC -> T" ("without trust there cannot be meaningful emotional connection to another human being").

    With the corrected premise, the argument would look something like this:

    P1: MEC -> T

    P2: ~I -> MEC

    C: H -> T

    The missing premise would be "H -> ~I," whose contrapositive is answer choice (A).

    There's a forum rule against posting direct quotes from PTs, by the way.

    0

Confirm action

Are you sure?