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

Need help with "ALL"

LsatbreakingnewsLsatbreakingnews Alum Member
in General 392 karma
I'm confused because I am in the some and most relationships lessons and the word "ALL" is being brought back from conditional logic. From my understanding "All" is a group 1 sufficient condition indicator in conditional logic. So for example All J are F = (J --> F) and to negate we take the contrapositive (/F --> /J) however in the some and most relationships lessons were being told to take "ALL" and negate it using "some not" which would bring (J --> F) into ( J some /F). So whats the difference between the two, when should we use one over the other I'm just kind of confused.
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • quinnxzhangquinnxzhang Member
    edited July 2016 611 karma
    @Euthyphro said:
    So for example All J are F = (J --> F) and to negate we take the contrapositive (/F --> /J)
    The negation of 'J → F' is not '/F → /J'. The contrapositive is logically equivalent to the conditional, so it can't be the conditional's negation. That is, the negation of P is true when P is false and is false when P is true. However, '/F → /J' is true when 'J → F' is true and false when 'J → F' is false.

    That said, there are still lots of problems with the way LSAT courses translate quantified sentences. In no logic course would "all J are F" be translated into 'J → F', and I think it hurts students to do this. However, for the sake of this curriculum, you're probably better off just memorizing that the negation of "all" is "some not".
  • LsatbreakingnewsLsatbreakingnews Alum Member
    edited July 2016 392 karma
    Ah I see. So contrapositive is not a negation just the same logically equivalent statement. Thanks I will just memorize that All's negation as "Some Not". Thanks again
Sign In or Register to comment.