Top Law Schools

Two questions.

1. Is this the correct way to diagram this formally?
A --> B --> C --> D

2. If something said, D is required for A, B and C, would that be correct?

Seems like a simple enough question, but I just want to make sure I have it down solidly (or maybe don't have it down at all and can correct that).

Thanks!

#1) I don't know if you'll ever actually get the wording of "A requires B requires C requires D", but if you did, yes, your diagramming would be correct.

#2 ) It depends on what you mean by "would that be correct".

If you were given A-->B-->C-->D, then it would be correct to conclude that "D is required for A, B and C".

However, if you were given that "D is required for A, B, and C", then it would not be correct to conclude that "A-->B-->C-->D". All we could conclude would three independent statements "A-->D", "B-->D", "C-->D".

Which way did you mean?

Oh okay, thanks. and I meant what I originally wrote. That D would be required for A, B and C.

As in, I was not mistaken/didn't make the incorrect assertion that because "D would be required for A, B and C" that "A--> B--> C--> D".

Thanks for clarifying!

I think I was just tripped up on the wording for "A requires B" and "A is required for B." I think I have it down but do you have any additional insight on this? Would be greatly appreciated!

WordPass wrote:I think I was just tripped up on the wording for "A requires B" and "A is required for B." I think I have it down but do you have any additional insight on this? Would be greatly appreciated!

I'm a bit of a grammar geek, so I think the easiest way to think about this is that one is active voice and one is passive voice (Joe ate the pizza VS The pizza was eaten by Joe). In both situations, Joe is the one doing the eating.

When we say that A requires B, A is the one doing the requiring, and A requires that B get into place in the necessary condition. A is the taskmaster, calling the shots, and B is the one who is required to appear in certain situations.

However, when A is required for B, it's now B that is doing the requiring. A, on the other hand, is now being told where he's needed (in the necessary condition).

The sufficient guy is DOING the requiring, calling the shots. The necessary guy is the one who is required, and is being told where he needs to show up.

Does that help?

That was actually a short, simple, and an amazing explanation. Helps a ton!