It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Finally done with the LR section of CC and going through my notes.
I dont remember which exact LR question this is from but I remember one of the questions said something along the lines of "doing A will ensure that B happens."
I have in my notes A -> B, but I want to make sure I didnt write that down wrong.
It sounds like A is sufficient for the occurence of B, not that A is necessary to make B happen.
Thoughts?
Comments
I agree with you, I think it's A -> B. Because all we know is that confirming A will ensure that B happens. But we don't know anything else about B. We don't know that if B happened that A must have happened.
I agree. I translated it as "It is always the case that when A happens B happens." By that logic, it should be A --> B.
Your intuitions are right on this one.
"Doing A will ensure that B happens" means if A -> B. B could happen without A, but meeting the condition of A will require that B follows.
Thanks y'all!