After being a tad nervous I'm one of those "dishonest" people JY talks about, I did my own knowledge check. Please let me know if this looks right to you!

Causation: " Walt smoked for 30 years and contracted lung cancer. Therefore, it's clear that smoking causes lung cancer"

- We observe a two seperate phenomena( walt smoked for 30 years & walt has lung cancer) and make a hypothesis about the events(smoking causes lung cancer).

Correlation: " The more cigarettes one smokes, the higher likelihood of contracting lung cancer"

- Saying that as the number of cigarettes increases, the higher the probability of contracting lung cancer. Were not saying smoking causes lung cancer but, rather observing the two events increasing together over time.

Sufficient and Necessary: " If you smoke, then you will get lung cancer"

- In this parallel universe, smoking will cause lung cancer 100% of the time. Even if you just smoke one time, it is a certainty that you will get lung cancer

So if im understanding correctly, " Causal Mechanisms" are assumptions the argument makes about the details of the cause and effect relationship?

When I was reading this, I couldnt help but wonder why, in this example, the "all statement" doesnt imply "most", giving us two split most statements until I realized that in order for you to draw a "some" inference from two most statements, the sufficient conditions for each statement must be the same.

Kinda just thinking out loud here but thought I would post to double check my understanding and if right, maybe help someone.

So Negation is the condition that makes the relationship false?

#help, For exercise #2, how do you know which indicator to pay attention to? "

"Amidala cannot deliver her speech unless the attempt to assassinate her fails."

Cannot ( Negate necessary indicator) vs Unless (negate sufficient indicator)

My translation to lawgic is coming out different depending on which indicator I use and I'm very confused. When I use "cannot" as my indicator, I get " unless the attempt fails → amildala delivers speech" or " amidala cannot deliver speech → unless assassination does not fail" which doesn't match his explanation. Are we just supposed to give higher priority to unless as a conditional indicator?

Any help/pointers would be appreciated!!

#Help

I'm trying to connect the dots with the previous lessons on "or/either" but I'm unsure if this is the correct way to think about it, can someone let me know if the below is a correct understanding?

Ex: "Unless corn is harvested in September or October, it will spoil"

Translation:

/Corn is (not )harvested in September and Corn is (not) harvested in October → it will spoil

If it does not spoil→ Corn was harvested in September or October or both.

My confusuion stems from the orginal example in 5.5 "Corn is harvested in September or October." On this question, the two "ideas" are Corn harvested in September and Corn harvested in October". In the answer for this question, the two groups become Corn being harvested in Sept. and Corn being harvested in October but, I'm not sure how to apply this to the example I gave? It feels like the example I gave is more likely to show up on the test since it's more complicated but I'm having a hard time knowing how the concept applies to more complex situations.

I was a little confused when he mentioned that answer choice E would be "better" if often was replaced with sometimes but then I remembered the lesson on quantifiers and how we can infer a some relationship from a many/most relationship(going down the quantifier scale) but you cannot infer an often relationship from a many relationship because often implies more than some. I'm not sure if JY specifically talked about "often" as a quantifier but in my brain the quantifier scale goes like this: from smallest to largest

none→one→some→few→many→most→overwhelming majority→all

So if an MSS or MBT answer choice includes a quantifier, make sure the quantifier stated in the answer is smaller than the quantifier stated in the stimulus.