## Formal Logic

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
stray

Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:18 pm

### Formal Logic

A some B <-/-> C --> D

That is a double not arrow. Can someone explain to me why an inference cant be A some D?
I know A some C is one by why not the other?

TheMostDangerousLG

Posts: 1545
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

### Re: Formal Logic

ColumbiaBigLaw wrote:A some B <-/-> C --> D

That is a double not arrow. Can someone explain to me why an inference cant be A some D?
I know A some C is one by why not the other?

I don't exactly understand what you're asking..

If "some A are B", and "no B are Cs", then you can't infer "some As are Cs", you can only infer "some As are not Cs". You can't say anything about the relationship between A and D.

stray

Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:18 pm

### Re: Formal Logic

TheMostDangerousLG wrote:
ColumbiaBigLaw wrote:A some B <-/-> C --> D

That is a double not arrow. Can someone explain to me why an inference cant be A some D?
I know A some C is one by why not the other?

I don't exactly understand what you're asking..

If "some A are B", and "no B are Cs", then you can't infer "some As are Cs", you can only infer "some As are not Cs". You can't say anything about the relationship between A and D.

Whoops, sorry man. I meant Some A's are not C's as an inference. And about A and D I was under the impression that you could for some reason. But nvm, It actually doesnt even make sense for there to be a relationship between A and D when I actually say it out.

Return to â€œLSAT Prep and Discussion Forumâ€?

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests