In/ Out Games: Rules Triggered vs Rules Irrelevant

Comments

• 1 Like

  BinghamtonDave Alum Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  August 2018 8716 karma

  Consider the following conditional relationship:
  In order for someone to be president of the USA they must be at least 35 years old.

  Given this conditional rule, prentend we are presented with the following 4 cases:

  -we find the president of the United States, what conclusion can we draw? What must be true? (Satisfy sufficient)

  -we find someone who is 29 years old, what conclusion can we draw? What must be true? (Fail necessary)

  ————————————

  -we find someone who is 36 years old, what conclusion can we draw? (Satisfy necessary)

  -we find someone who is not the president of the United States, what conclusion can we draw? (Fail sufficient)

  There are two ways this can pan out:
  1. If the answers to the above questions are automatic and intuitive, you understand conditional relationships well enough to handle the bulk of what is tested on in and out games, your problem is most likely following what on our game board equates to “satisfied”/ what it means on our game board for a rule to fail.

  1. If you don’t have answers to these questions, the issue is probably a matter of conditional logic skills that need further practice.

  Either way, answers to the above exercise might help shed some light on the issue here.

  David
• 2 Likes

  TheDeterminedC Member

  August 2018 edited August 2018 1025 karma

  I totally had the same trouble when I got to in-out games as well. I could not for the life of me understand this necessary/sufficent triggering stuff.

  I'd like to say that using english to understand these rules helps tremendously. If you ever get stuck in blind review, you can substitute Q for an idea and K for and idea and see why K being satisfied does not imply anything for Q.

  I'll explain the process of the drilling that I did and it wasn't simply memorization (that didn't work for me), but it gave me an understanding of why these rules have the implications they do and also when they don't have any. In really tough games, this understanding is what makes the difference IMO. So while you have a question on this particular game here, it points to a hazy understand of the process behind the logic. Fix this and you will improve on every game going forward.

  I suggest not looking at a particular game to figure this out. I believe it will come a bit easier to recognize how to diagram the not both/or rules if you take the time to just work specifically on this outside of a game first.

  Frist step I did was memorize what or and not/both look like as a conditional. This is critical because conditionals are a kind of language. As such, being able to quickly see a conditional chain and see a not both instantly is necessary. It's also needed when you transfer the words in english to a conditional without much thought while still being extremely accurate. So for this, write "not both" on one side of a flash card and the other side write "A ----> /B." For the next one, write "or" on one side and "/A ----> B" on the other. Take 30 minutes or so and drill this into your brain. The CC also has fantastic flashcards to use as well. Make sure you do those over a few times.

  After memorizing the english in logic language, start to move on to how these rules transfer onto a game board.

  Simply make two lines for a "selected group" group on the left and two lines to the right for an "out" group. This part is purely experimental. Using one rule at a time, choose to write down an or rule (/B --> A) or a not both rule (A --> /B). Once you pick one rule for these two pieces, put the two pieces on the game board however you like, but do not violate the rule. See how both or and not both rules interact and what the rule visually looks like on the game board. Start by placing the necessary on one side, see what you have to do with A when this B is placed somewhere and vice versa. This part will answer your question and give you an understanding of what happens with these rules when the necessary is satisfied or not. Basically, with any conditional at all, if the necessary is satisfied, the sufficient can do whatever it wants. This exercise helped me see that.

  Finally, I'd suggest going back to the CC and redoing the exercise of diagraming English into logic language.

  All this together will hopefully give you a better understanding of not only how the rules trigger, but also how to accurately and reliably see inferences in future games.
• shegotit Member

  August 2018 211 karma

  @BinghamtonDave I got it when it came to the failed necessary and satisfied necessary but got lost with the sufficient parts. Thank you for taking the time to write this out for me
• shegotit Member

  August 2018 211 karma

  @TheDeterminedC thank you I am about to try this now