"No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject"
I see it this way: If you lack knowledge then you're not competent to pass judgment.
Kaplan has it reversed however, saying "Competence in passing judgment requires knowledge." I would translate this to Competence -------> Knowledge
Someone explain this please.
Put this premise in Conditional Reasoning Forum
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:23 pm
- FreeGuy
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:42 pm
Re: Put this premise in Conditional Reasoning
They didn't reverse it, they just took the contrapositive.deputamadre wrote:"No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject"
I see it this way: If you lack knowledge then you're not competent to pass judgment.
Kaplan has it reversed however, saying "Competence in passing judgment requires knowledge." I would translate this to Competence -------> Knowledge
Someone explain this please.
Lack knowledge -> Not competent to pass judgment
Contrapositive:
If you are competent to pass judgment, then you must have knowledge..
Both your translation of the original statement, and the Kaplan version, are valid.
- yoni45
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:12 am
Re: Put this premise in Conditional Reasoning
You're both right -- Kaplan doesn't have it reversed, it just has it presented in terms of the contrapositive... =)deputamadre wrote:"No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject"
I see it this way: If you lack knowledge then you're not competent to pass judgment.
Kaplan has it reversed however, saying "Competence in passing judgment requires knowledge." I would translate this to Competence -------> Knowledge
Someone explain this please.
Yours: If you lack knowledge then you're not competent to pass judgment.
Symbolized: ~Knowledge --> ~Competence
Kaplan: Competence in passing judgment requires knowledge.
Symbolized: Competence --> Knowledge
EDIT: What he said... ^_^
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Re: Put this premise in Conditional Reasoning
Wow. Guess my mind was worn after 3.5 of hours of flaw questions. Thanks guys
- theZeigs
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:26 pm
Re: Put this premise in Conditional Reasoning
See here too:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=110024
I had to struggle through this. Going to add to that particular post in the next few days with some further thoughts, etc.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=110024
I had to struggle through this. Going to add to that particular post in the next few days with some further thoughts, etc.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login