The indicator "even if"

mc_meatt

Hi, I know that there are many words that indicate what groups (universal quantifiers) you are in. Among them, where does the word "even if" belong to? Thanks.

J.Y. Ping

It doesn't.

Group "even if" with "even though" and "although" and "though" and "in spite of" and "despite".

These words all indicate that the speaker is about to concede points away from her argument. In the abstract, it's something like: Even if XYZ is true, I don't care about that. I don't care about XYZ. I'm still going to make my argument that ABC is true for reasons EFG.

The XYZ could be thought of as anticipating points that an opponent would bring up. Or laying down the context of your argument.

Can you take this abstraction and create your own concrete argument as an example to elucidate the concept for yourself and other 7Sagers?

extramedium

@j.y. ping How do you justify Q24, S3 on PT 46? "Anything" serves to modify the necessary in this instance, even though it is usually sufficient. "Even if" appears to modify the sufficient. This question is conditional as are most SA questions, so it appear to have a purpose as a modifier here.

Sami

@extramedium
I think the difference between "anything" and "even if", is that the word "anything" applies to all the nouns that are about to be listed and it serves the function of what it means to be a sufficient indicator.

For example:
Anything that jumps is a cat.
So we know that if we know that something jumps it has to be a cat. And that applies to all nouns that "jump". And that's why even though "anything" is attached to "jumps", it acts as a sufficient indicator.

The problem with "even if "is that it does not function the same role of what it would mean to be a sufficient indicator.
Even if, some apples are red does not mean that they are sweet because......
I like this flower even if it does not smell good.
But if I changed it to,
Anything that's red is not sweet. (it would definitely translate into a sufficient necessary relationship)

The reason anything works as a sufficient indicator is because it fits neatly into what it means to be sufficient to produce a necessary condition. It's more about the concept. Even if, although, but etc. just don't have the same function.

For PT 46 Section 3 Question 24, are you referring to answer choice "A"?
Anything is still attached to the sufficient indicator:
Anything that exists will continue to exist even if everyone lost a belief in it.
Exist-----> it would exist despite loss of belief

which is the contrapositive of our conditional statement in the stimulus:
Universal loss of belief in money ---> money doesn't exist
money exist ----> not the case that all that it would take is universal loss of belief in it.
Which is what answer choice "A" is doing.

extramedium

Bump. Sorry didn't see your post @Sami Thanks for all your help today.

Sami

@extramedium said:
Bump. Sorry didn't see your post @Sami Thanks for all your help today.

No problem : ) Thank you for starting such great discussions! I had fun talking to you

Mo Zubair

@vrendonvasquez thought i should copy you on this. I was confused aboout even if as well until i came across the discussion above. JY, himself clarified that even if is (for LSAT Purposes) not a logical indicator.

gioaragon95

Just My tip

for these I have found that though they are not that important for knowing the core arguments in LR. For RC I have found them to be very important in deducing what the authors stances on a particular issue are. When you sees this type of claim being stated one should note it.
Why? Because they are apart of the stance of that particular arguer.

conceding statements are important to the stance of the author especially if they are making a counter argument against a certain point.