- Tue Oct 05, 2021 1:50 pm
#91050
I was wondering if anyone could help me understand diagrammig passages using conditional logic. For example, I am able to correctly identify the premise(s) and conclusions; however, I struggle with condensing complexe conditional statements into a few words (or more specifically, a letter). When I go back to link together what I am diagramming, I either have too many letters:
(ex: If we thought the outcome of history were inevitable, we would not work so hard to transform institutions of capitalist society. But to transform them we must first understand them, and we can only understand them by an analysis of their history,. This is why historical analysis is important in socialist argument).
I am able to grasp this concept when it can be put in A-->B notation, however, I struggle with identifying other elements of the argument. My question would be how do you identify all of the letters in an argument to make a conditional chain? The transitive property makes sense. It's the other ones where X is A, X is B....etc) ANy help will be greatly appreciated.
(ex: If we thought the outcome of history were inevitable, we would not work so hard to transform institutions of capitalist society. But to transform them we must first understand them, and we can only understand them by an analysis of their history,. This is why historical analysis is important in socialist argument).
I am able to grasp this concept when it can be put in A-->B notation, however, I struggle with identifying other elements of the argument. My question would be how do you identify all of the letters in an argument to make a conditional chain? The transitive property makes sense. It's the other ones where X is A, X is B....etc) ANy help will be greatly appreciated.