A brief example of outside information ... stimulus says A is correlated with B, therefore A causes B. We ... say that 1) B actually causes A, 2) that some ... factor C causes both A and B, or 3) there ... is no relationship between A and B (just as many ...
A or B translates to /A -----> B, or is negate sufficient. The not both just makes it a biconditional /AB. So that would just be two worlds, A in, B out and B in, A out.
... Correlation Example: "A is more likely to happen if B occurs. This ... directly increases the likelihood of A occurring." In this example, ... what is actually causing A and B to appear. However, ... B means that A will likely appear (because C causes A). Thus, A and B ...
... all hours. I found a perfect mixture of medications I ... also started eating dinner a bit later so I ... don't think there is amost important change, just depends ... did used to drink a lot with friends after ... 4 nights a week) so that was something most important to ...
To keep it simple, the biconditional requires A or B to be in, but not both. The not both rule could have both out. You can think of it in terms of max out
... not common (or I have a bad memory). It's certainly ... seems to hew to a reasonable interpretation principle: a statement shouldn't ... Alan's joining us is a precondition for vacationing in Colorado ... same structure "We can only A if B" but (5) differs from ...
... seems to hew to a reasonable interpretation principle: a statements shouldn't ... same structure "We can only A if B" but (5) differs from ... adjective or verb) if B" = "A only if B"
I did ... examples of "only A (one adjective or verb) if B"
...
Few are A = Some are A, most are not A
Few ... dogs are evil = Some dogs are evil, but most ... are not A = Some are not A, most are A ...
Some dogs are not evil, but most ... /(free booze) --> /(most people show up)
...
... consciousness needs more than (a) and (b); if (a) and (b) were sufficient to ... explain consciousness, then why wouldn't a ... , AC (B), which adds a premise that _more_ than (a) and (b) is necessary ...
... Premise 2: B ---> C
> Conclusion: ~A some ~B
> ... world that is neither **a dog** nor **a cat**.
> ... Premise 2: B ---> C
> Conclusion: ~A some ~B
> ... world that is neither **a dog** nor **a cat**.
> ...
They say that "AB" only **excludes ... ** the situation that "A and B both occurs ... careful not to confuse "A --> /B" with "A /B". They are not the ...
... about the contrapositive. /B therefore /A, but isn't shouldn ... [Lawgic]
> A –> B
> /B
> _____< ... in this scenario. A=Doctors, B=Treat patients
Since ... said the contrapositive is /B therefore /A, it would be "** ...
... in one sentence: If A causes B, then you know that ... that not having B will _cause_ not having A.
[Of ... causality, i.e., A _always_ causes B. If A merely tends to ... cause B, then you can ... infer that if not B, then not A.]
Actually! FYI for anyone who came into see this question... you can't apply both rules! Use only one of the rules to apply and the remaining variable simply becomes negated!
.
.
Therefore, A or B but not both
= /A ---> /B