Curious how everyone would do this. Try telling me before reading all this, or even just skip reading what I did, I really am curious purely what shorthand everyone uses for conversions.

Ok I just started learning about lawgic and came back to this question. I need some help.

I'm convinced mapping to lowgic is the fastest way to do this in the long run. But currently, I'm really slow at it. I just spend 5:30 on this question!

My problem is reading and mapping to the same thing deterministically. For this question I accidentally mapped like this:

Turned "price it pays for coffee beans continues to increase" into "GC" for "Greater Cost", and "the Coffee Shoppe will have to increase its prices" into "GP" for "Greater Price". So, GC -> GP. So far so good.

Then "either the Coffee Shoppe will begin selling noncoffee products or its coffee sales will decrease" into "NC | DS" for "Non Coffee OR Decreased Sale". So now I have GP -> NC | DS.

Then I turned "decrease the Coffee Shoppe's overall profitability" into "DP" for "Decreased Profitability". So now NC -> DP

Then I turned "can avoid a decrease in overall profitability" into "/DOP" for "NOT Decreased Overall Profitability" and "coffee sales do not decrease" into "/DCS" for "NOT Decreased Coffee Sales". Notice this is where I messed up. I mapped things I had already defined into new acronyms. I had:

GC -> GP

GP -> NC | DS

NC -> DP

/DOP -> /DCS

But I should have had:

GC -> GP

GP -> NC | DS

NC -> DP

/DP -> /DS

Now its obvious that

DS -> DP, and since also NC -> DP, then now NC | DS can just be set to DP, giving:

GC -> GP

GP -> DP

Therefore GC -> DP, and back to english is "If cost of beans increase, Shoppe will have decreased profits", which is exactly what C says, so it took me 3 seconds to find that. But getting to GC -> DP was the key.

...So how do I make that faster, and how do I avoid mistakes like mapping the same thing to two different lawgic acronyms? That is what took all my time to realize I had done that, which is why nothing was coming out of the original mappings I had. Maybe there is better shorthand to use that would help me be more clear, but also short enough to be fast still?

I will try again now after writing all this:

Mapping First:

Bean price increases -> Shoppe increases prices

Shoppe increases prices -> Sells NCP | CSD

Sells NCP -> DOP

/DOP -> /CSD

------------------------

Now Transformation:

CSD -> DOP

Sells NCP | CSD -> DOP

Shoppe increases prices -> DOP

Bean price increases -> DOP

"If bean prices increase, then Coffee Shoppe will have a Decrease in Overall Profitibility", answer C.

...Ok that was a bit faster, but typing was slow, probably faster on paper. Still trying to find that balance of clarity and brevity. If a person could just instantly map this all to something like

BPI -> SIP

SIP -> NCP | CSD

NCP -> DOP

/DOP -> /CSD

-------------------------

CSD -> DOP

NCP | CSD -> DOP

-------------------------

BPI -> SIP -> DOP

BPI -> DOP

-------------------------

"if Bean Price Increases, then Decrease in Overall Profitability", answer C.

That would be soooo fast. That is my goal. Acronyms are so much faster to read and move around in lawgic, but how important is retaining the context of each in your voice in your head? Curious what everyone would do and if you actually read everything I did, thank you and I would love to hear what I can do to improve so I can do this without even thinking.

1

1 comments

  • Edited 2 hours ago

    I did read through the lawgic that you have diagram and I think it would be faster if you could combine some of them! Eventually, diagraming the conditionals would come to you naturally and would not have too much trouble doing them.

    Following is how I mapped:

    Price CB ↑ CS ↑Sell non-coffee product OR Sale Overall profitability

    Avoid Overall profitability↓ → /CS

    Going through the answer choices, C would be the only one that will work out!

    I think one way you can improve is keeping in mind all the words that indicate sufficient and necessary conditions, and identify exactly where the arrows should point toward. Also, if there are things you can combine, try combining them (For example, if a premise says A→B, B→C, then directly diagraming them as A→B→C)

    I used to frequently refer back to my notes when doing diagramming but now it comes naturally to me.

    1
You've reached the end of the comments.

Confirm action

Are you sure?