Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Confusing S for N versus N for S

Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
edited April 2021 in Logical Reasoning 2249 karma

Premise: Resign--->Convicted
Conclusion: Convicted--->Resign
Would this be confusing N for S or S for N? I thought the two were interchangeable but they aren't right? Because this is a mistaken reversal, which is confusing N for S? The answer choice says confusing S for N, but isn't it the reverse?

Resign---> Convicted
/Resign---> /Convicted
Would this be confusing S for N?

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • ranban_97ranban_97 Member
    8 karma

    This would be confusing necessary for sufficient. The premise is saying: "If you resign, then it is necessary that you are convicted." The conclusion is saying: "If you are convicted, it is necessary that you resigned." However, this is not right; there could be a variety of other reasons for you getting convicted other than resigning. We don't know what those reasons are from the info here, but have no reason to think that the ONLY way to get convicted is by resigning.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    edited April 2021 2249 karma

    The answer choice says confusing S for N though. That is why I am confused. PT 22, Section 2, #25

  • yunonsieyunonsie Member
    611 karma

    The first premise/conclusion you outlined does both: confuses S for N and confuses N for S.

    Mm why do you think they’re not interchangeable? Pretty sure, at least in this case, that they are. I haven’t come across this specifically before.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    edited April 2021 2249 karma

    I wasn't sure because mistaken reversals and negations are presented separately so I thought mistaking S for N and N for S were separate. So whether the ac said confuses a N condition for S or S for N, they are both correct?
    As for answer choice D, is that even a logical error?

  • yunonsieyunonsie Member
    611 karma

    I think wires are getting crossed here.

    Mistaken reversals: S for N or N for S
    -Both these things happen when you jump from that premise to that conclusion

    Negation isn't relevant to this. If you negated the conclusion, "it's possible to be convicted and not resign." That doesn't tell you anything about the correct answer choice or the flaw. Keep in mind, negation =/= contrapositive as well. Pretty sure negation is taught so you can double check necessary assumption answers.

  • yunonsieyunonsie Member
    611 karma

    I don't think (D) is a logical error. The conclusion isn't about a specific belief, the conclusion is a comparison of two beliefs.

Sign In or Register to comment.