Top Law Schools

Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.

I would say: Feels pain ----> scientific experimentation prohibited.

How do you know which one is the "if" part and which one is the "then" part.

any=if

deputamadre wrote:Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.

I would say: Feels pain ----> scientific experimentation prohibited.

How do you know which one is the "if" part and which one is the "then" part.

You have it right. This is why

Sci exp. should be prohibited. (this is the action, per say)
Creature capable of feeling pain (this is a stipulation)

The IF is the stipulation, followed by the action that occurs if the stipulation is followed...


HTH...

deputamadre wrote:Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.

I would say: Feels pain ----> scientific experimentation prohibited.

How do you know which one is the "if" part and which one is the "then" part.

Simply trying to turn this into a if/then statement leads to only one solution that makes sens.

If it can feel pain --> then sci experimentation should be prohibited.

Reversing the terms doesn't make sense.

Sometimes it's hard to tell which is the necessary and sufficient condition.

The subtle word here is any which also means all.

All tends to correspond to a sufficient condition (i.e. all creatures that feel pain should not be scientifically experimented on).

Barbie wrote:

deputamadre wrote:Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.

I would say: Feels pain ----> scientific experimentation prohibited.

How do you know which one is the "if" part and which one is the "then" part.

Sci exp. should be prohibited. (this is the action, per say)

^^This. "should", "must" etc are all indicators of the necessary condition.

deputamadre wrote:Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.

I would say: Feels pain ----> scientific experimentation prohibited.

How do you know which one is the "if" part and which one is the "then" part.

From what I learned in logic class...

(x)(Px&Cx--> -Sx)

(x) is universal, so anything with x in front of it applies to anything else with x in front of it. Anything in the universe that has x after it is has the properties that are implied by the premise.

So, Px&Cx means "all things that exists that are creatures AND capable of feeling pain". It is important to note that when translated to formal logic, the sentence doesn't mean "a creature that is capable of feeling pain", it is "a creature AND capable of feeling pain". Since you could have a robot that can feel pain, etc. (Not really, but for the sake of logic...)

The --> is for the conditional if-then statement. If the thing you choose is has the properties, then the consequent is true. So, universally, for everything that has the properties, everything follows the same conclusion.

-Sx (by itself) means everything should NOT (not is denoted by -) have scientific experimentation performed on it.

So, in summary, for everything, if it is is a creature AND is capable of feeling pain, then no scientific experimentation should take place.

Of course this was probably way more detailed than you needed...

A really tough sentence to translate would be: "Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain only if the experimentation performed causes pain. Some experimentation does not cause pain. There are creatures that are capable of feeling pain. Therefore, some forms of scientific experimentation should be allowed on creatures that can feel pain." Pretty obvious to see its true, but translating it/proving it is the tough part.