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

"Only" example with Lawgic, Please help me figure this out!

sarahc14sarahc14 Core Member
edited February 2021 in Logical Reasoning 103 karma

Hey Everyone! This may seem like a simple example of an "only" lawgic example, but I can't for the life of me understand why this diagrams the way it does. I was trying to diagram this sentence (which is from another resource), "I only work on Tuesdays." I used T for Tuesday and W for work. I originally diagrammed it as T->W because I thought "only" introduces a necessary condition, however, when I looked up the answer it said W->T.

Another example that is similar to this is "Sarah only dates funny guys," and I diagrammed it F->D, again thinking that only introduces necessary, when the actual diagram is D->F.

I have been looking at these for the past hour and would love some feedback/help on what I may not be seeing! Thanks

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • FaviPapi-1-1FaviPapi-1-1 Member
    edited February 2021 313 karma

    Here is my quick answer:

    Conditionality is all about absolute rules... That said, even though we have trigger words such as “only,” there are still “exceptions.” So, when I read your two examples, I thought: “well, that’s interesting...”

    For the second example, I asked myself, what is necessary?

    If Sarah dates, then funny guys?
    OR
    If funny guys, then Sara dates?

    The first one sound more reasonable and absolute from just the sentence: Sarah only dates funny guys.

    In short, think of conditionality as absolute rules and ask what is necessary...

    Good luck

  • sarakimmelsarakimmel Member ⭐
    1488 karma

    Those are tricky, but if you rephrase them, they become “the only,” which indicates sufficient. ie “the only guys Sarah dates are funny.” What they are saying is that all the guys Sarah dates are funny, not that Sarah dates all guys who are funny (she would be a busy girl).
    The work example is a bit less obvious, but same basic thing, you can rephrase to “the only day I work is Tuesday” which doesn’t necessarily mean I work every Tuesday, just that if I am working, it’s Tuesday.
    Does that help?

  • Sailor Moon LSATSailor Moon LSAT Member ⭐
    200 karma

    I think that "only" is a really tricky indicator in short sentences like this. Basically, you just have to figure out which one in your mind is necessary for the other. I think the key for that sentence is that you can move the only, and the lawgic still stays the same.

    Let's see with this
    I only work on Tuesdays.
    If we did it mechanically, we would get T-->W but then if we translate this back into English, we see that the meaning doesn't make sense. This is saying if it's Tuesday, I am working. Is working the necessary condition of it being Tuesday? Do you have to work for it to be a Tuesday? And what happens if we fail the sufficient. If it's not Tuesday, this means that the necessary (working) could still happen. But we know from the sentence that this is impossible because the person only works on Tuesdays.

    I work only on Tuesdays (the only can be moved and the sentence still makes sense)
    W-->T. This is helpful because if the person is working, you know it's tuesday. And if you fail the sufficient, if the person is not working, it can still be Tuesday.

    I also think the explanation by @sarakimmel is really good.

Sign In or Register to comment.