In the Lawgic curriculum, JY has basically set out certain formulaic methods for the different groups... so the part that follows the group 2 indicator becomes the necessary condition.
Depending on my work plans (that should be determined in a month or so), I'd be interested in leading the September BR group, unless there already is one or is someone far more qualified to lead it! Just throwing it out there.
I've been playing around with this some more this morning and agree that now memorizing "converting" Group 3 and Group4 indicators to another type is one more thing to remember, and one too many. That slowed me down.
... be chosen for the in group. So in a grouping game ... version by specifying a specific group to which the rule applies ... always interpret this as a group4 translation, and anything beyond that ...
... would be necessary because when negated, would no longer allow us ... . In addition to that, if negated, what actually does this say ... " is a necessary condition indicator. This negated would sever the premise and ...
Thanks @jkatz1488 and @Sami ! I guess this leads me to another question, is "not" a part of group4? I put that down in my notes early on but now I'm second guessing that.
... to negating the necessary condition (group4) which in this instance would ... " again acts as negating necessary (Group4) making the negation of the ... having issues just recognizing when group4 indicators are occurring in sentences ...