... premise correctly, but if it's "mostA'sareB's" and "mostB'sare C's", then we can't say ... the conclusion "some young women in China are men" (someAare C) is clearly ... not correct.
... If all A'sareB's and the conclusion is someB'sare C's, all A'sare C's would ... Its actually invalid. The some or most statements have to be ... The arrow and the most statement only go one ... biconditional. If you pour all A's …
... ’m not a tragedy… I could still be sad. What if I ...
[English] MostA’sareB’s. MostB’sare C’s. Therefore, someA’sare C’s
[Lawgic] A -most-> B -most-> C ...
... most people make a profit, but what if these idiots (the "some" of #3) are ... (B). Most people who invest (A) make a profit (C). MostA'sareB's. MostA'sare C's. SomeB'nicole.hopkinsAugust 2015General
... me know if these are reliable or if they can see a blind spot ... parallel. If the stimulus' conclusion is something like "All X'sare Ys ... " and there are answer choices that say "SomeA'sareB's" or "All A'saresomeB's," then ...
... and reached the section about "Some and Most Relationships." I understand that ... the negation of "all" is "some not ... />
"All A'sareB's."
Group 1 translation: A→B
Negation: A←some→/B
... if I told you All A'sare usually B's, All A'sare often B's or All A'sare sometimes B's ... " as the necessary condition, but then again, that is usually going ... possible necessary/sufficient conditions, but some words have meanings so clearly ...
... />
Second, if "many" really were equivalent to "some", then the negation of ... to "all not". If "many" were equivalent to "some", then when I say ... . "SomeA'sareB's" is true if there is only one A&B thing or a million A ...
... not LSAT logic, "If P, then Q" and "All A'sareB's" are very different. In ... sure if you're asking whether there are arguments in which *some* atomic ... propositions don't show up more than once, or if ...
... You wrote above all non-A'sareB's. We don't know that ... many A's and B'sare not intersecting. So by saying "Some non-A'sare non-B's" we are ... it could be some, most, or even all. But "some" is the ...
... the fact that, in most conversational situations, if you were to assert ... would imply “someA’sare not B’s”. Why?—Because if you knew that All A’sareB’s, why ... .
... . If not full on diagramming with arrows, at least "All C'sare ... A'sareB's, mostB'sare C's and all C'sare D's
matches
All cats are ... are scary. (this is an All A'sareB'
An example would be All A'sareB's EXCEPT WHEN they are C's. That in english essentially means, if you are an A but NOT a C, then you areaB. So Diagrammed, it would be A+~C---->B. Can anyone check my Reasoning on that? Lol
... be that ALL As are Bs, just that someA’sareB’s for the argument ... negation of AC1 allows for some effective approaches to be fun ... the negation of some is none. If no effective approaches are fun, the ...
... if it makes sense to you then go with it. No A’sareB’s translates ... to A implies not B. You ... as /A -> B. “If you are not an A, then you areaB.” “Not being an A implies B.”
... the defendant might have a reasonable argument if he had not complied ... Aa subset of B, meaning all A'sareB's but maybe not all B'sareA's? Does A have some ... and make them more restrictive if they want.
@Beth. Could you properly infer that most cars are not sedans? "Some" can include "most" right (if 99/100 cars are sedans, then "some cars are sedans" and it wouldn't be proper to infer that "most cars are not sedans")? Or am I misunderstanding? Thanks.