is there a lesson to refer back to on why we can't conclude "some" relationships from two sufficient arrows?

#help

does this still hold that B or C in A->B or C are jointly necessary?

@SaraMoreno let's say if it's a Friday, I'm going out or I'm going to bed early

F -> Out OR Early

if we split the arrow:

F -> going out

F -> going to bed early

this is incorrect, because it's saying if it's a Friday, both of those things MUST be true, whereas what the sentence is saying is it's one or the other

There could be a scenario where both could be true, let's say I go out early so I come home early. But it's a possibility and not a certainty, so that's why they're jointly necessary

@Brian Garrison here, "the only" has a different contextual context than "only"

"the only" is sufficient because it's not introducing a requirement, but rather a trigger

example:

only people who eat their vegetables get their icecream: here eating vegetables is a necessary requirement for getting your icecream

get icecream -> eat veggies

the only people who eat their vegetables get their icecream: here, people who eat vegetables is the sufficient trigger for getting vegetables, but there are other possible ways for you to get icecream

eat veggies -> get icecream