Can someone explain to me how the cat and restaurant arguments are formally equivalent? It seems to me like the cat argument has three variables: cats, mammals, and Garfield, (G>C>M) while the restaurant has only two variables: new restaurants and living standards. (NRO>LSI … NRO is true so LSI is true) would that not catch you out on a match the structure question? I understand they’re both considered conditional logic and we’re not going into the terminology details but ‘formally equivalent’ seems like a strong claim.

@MarisolSanchez I think about it in terms of ‘if then’ statements. If (sufficient condition) then (necessary condition). The ‘if’ part is on the left, the ‘then’ part on the right. If Jedi, then force. If cat, then mammal. They will sometimes put the ‘then’ part before the ‘if’ part so look out for that. ‘You can use the force if you are a Jedi’ is still ‘if Jedi, then force.’ I believe he’ll address exceptions later, but this becomes harder when they use terms like ‘only if’ which proceeds (sufficient condition) only if (necessary condition) or ‘unless’. He’ll probably explain ‘unless’ better than I can though, it’s tricky.