Avoiding False Inferences — False Blocks

[Mmjd12]

Hi there,

I came across this example in LGB which is very confusing, any help would be great:

This section talks about being aware of incorrectly diagramming a rule using blocks. The example provided states:

Each rock classic (R) is immediately preceded on the CD by a new composition (N).

The explanation states diagramming this using a block [NR] would be wrong:

“ This representation is incorrect. The diagram above implies R and N are always in a block formation, that is, every time N appears then R immediately follows, and every time N appears then R immediately follows, and every time R appears then N immediately precedes. Take a moment to re-read the rule. Does the rule state the two variables are in block formation? No, what the rules states is that every rock classic is preceded by a new composition. There is no statement that every new composition is followed by a rock classic. So, this rule is only triggered when a rock classic is present. Thus, the rule is conditional, and should be diagrammed as follows:

R —————-> [N R] “

However, a page before, a similar linear game was provided where the rule states:

D is seen immediately before F is seen.

And the diagram provided simply, [DF]

I am not seeing the difference between the two examples here. I am using an older copy so perhaps this advice was updated in more recent editions. But the language is nearly identical in these two rules, I don’t understand why the diagramming would be different.

[Adam Tyson]

The difference, Mmjd12, is that in the case of the false blocks, there will be multiple Rs and Ns in the diagram. Every R must have an N before it, but not every N needs an R after it. But in the other game, there is only one D and only one F, so when they say that D is immediately before F, that block will happen exactly once, and that single F must have that single D right before it. There won't be another F elsewhere in the game!

[Mmjd12]

Oh that makes perfect sense thank you