jeffersonairplane14

Comments

• So, in weakening questions, the author has left his analysis/theory incomplete. With that incomplete theory, he goes on to make a strong conclusion. Hence, there is no reason to believe that the conclusion is supported by the theory.

  in Weakening Questions (Attack what?) Comment by jeffersonairplane14 October 2014
• Does this mean, we can break this compound conditional statement into: if X, then not Y if X, then not Z

  in "Neither Nor" LG Conditional Rules Comment by jeffersonairplane14 October 2014
• To simplify: (-a -> b) -> c, think of the expression (-a -> b) as y. That is, y=(-a -> b). Then, we get y -> c, or, -c -> -y (taking contrapositive) or, -c -> (-a -> b) or, -c AND -a -> b

  in a unless b but only if c. Comment by jeffersonairplane14 October 2014
• I am interested as well guys. I work downtown and live in Reston.

  in DC/MD/VA Study Buddy for February Exam! Comment by jeffersonairplane14 September 2014