E <--|--> F --> G --> H
I understand why F --> H and G some
You have to combine inferences, I think. I'm a bit rusty at this, but let me give it a shit.spets wrote:Hi, I'm working on PS's section on formal logic and there is one problem that I don't quite understand:
E <--|--> F --> G --> H
I understand why F --> H and G someEare inferences, but the answer key also includes H someE. I'm not sure how this inference can be made since it shouldn't be able to go against the arrow, even with the inherent inference (H some G).
lolz for boldKnockglock wrote:You have to combine inferences, I think. I'm a bit rusty at this, but let me give it a shit.spets wrote:Hi, I'm working on PS's section on formal logic and there is one problem that I don't quite understand:
E <--|--> F --> G --> H
I understand why F --> H and G someEare inferences, but the answer key also includes H someE. I'm not sure how this inference can be made since it shouldn't be able to go against the arrow, even with the inherent inference (H some G).
F--->H (All F's are H)
+
F<--/-->E (No F's are E)
= (well if All F's are H, and No F's are E, some H's can't be E's)
H <some / > E (some H's can't be E's)
Apologies if this is incorrect, like I said i'm super rusty and am in need of a formal logic review.