Sufficient condition

1st content goes first - before the arrow

2nd content goes 2nd - after the arrow

Necessary condition

1st content goes second - after the arrow

2nd content goes first - before the arrow

i must say the comments have me dying of laughter...mainly because i feel the pain. This whole section has me messed up!

can context be seen as a support to the premise - more so than support to a conclusion, which in turn would make it a premise. I understand how there is a difference. But I still see how context is supportive...am I making sense?

Analogous (Tiger): Not all human grade foods are safe for dogs. After all, chocolates, raisins, and grapes, if consumed are very toxic and deadly for dogs.

Analogous (Walt): John is taking his dog to the groomers for a service that costs $100. The owner of the grooming salon is providing a discount to doberman owners, as she is one herself. John received $20 off of his service. Therefore, John must be a doberman owner.

Analogous (Fat Cat): The driveway has been cleared from snow. The shovel is not in its usual storage spot. Dads snow boots are wet as if he had just come in. Therefore, Dad must have been the one to shovel the snow from the driveway.

Note: It was not intentional to have so many dog themed responses LOL