Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

youknowryan
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:20 am

Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

Postby youknowryan » Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:02 pm

It's the logical negation I not 100% on. I broke it down below. Please weigh in whether I am right or wrong.

The statement:
"People tend not to understand the purpose of restrictions unless they participate in the formulation."

It diagrams like so:
~participate formulation-> ~understand purpose
understand purpose-> participate formulation

“If…then” rewording:
If people understand the purpose of restrictions, then they participated in their formation.

Logical negation confusion... here's my best take on it:
When people understand the purpose of restrictions, they did not necessarily participate in their formation.

Part of me wants to reword it to:
People do not necessarily understand the purpose of restrictions, even when participate in their formation.

Please help!

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

Postby suspicious android » Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:12 pm

"People tend not to understand the purpose of restrictions unless they participate in the formulation."

understand purpose of restrictions ---> participate in formulation of those restrictions
UPR --> PFR

Negation:
UPR & ~PFR
People can understand the purpose of restrictions even if they do not participate in the formulation.

A good thing to remember, the negation of a conditional is never another conditional statement, it generally can be phrased most easily with "even if".

User avatar
510Chicken
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

Postby 510Chicken » Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:14 pm

suspicious android wrote:"People tend not to understand the purpose of restrictions unless they participate in the formulation."

understand purpose of restrictions ---> participate in formulation of those restrictions
UPR --> PFR

Negation:
UPR & ~PFR
People can understand the purpose of restrictions even if they do not participate in the formulation.

A good thing to remember, the negation of a conditional is never another conditional statement, it generally can be phrased most easily with "even if".

To be fair, that negation is already possible with the original statement because of the word "tend".

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

Postby suspicious android » Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:18 pm

510Chicken wrote:To be fair, that negation is already possible with the original statement because of the word "tend".


This is fair.

User avatar
EarlCat
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 4:04 pm

Re: Ugly conditional statement needs logical negation- HELP!

Postby EarlCat » Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:42 pm

510Chicken wrote:
suspicious android wrote:"People tend not to understand the purpose of restrictions unless they participate in the formulation."

understand purpose of restrictions ---> participate in formulation of those restrictions
UPR --> PFR

Negation:
UPR & ~PFR
People can understand the purpose of restrictions even if they do not participate in the formulation.

A good thing to remember, the negation of a conditional is never another conditional statement, it generally can be phrased most easily with "even if".

To be fair, that negation is already possible with the original statement because of the word "tend".


People tend to understand the purpose of restrictions even if they do not participate in the formulation.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cianchetta0, dontsaywhatyoumean, DumbHollywoodActor and 9 guests