#15 - Sonya: Anyone who lives without constant awareness of

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True-SN. The correct answer choice is (D)

Here we have the following conditional statements (each followed by its contrapositive):

const. awareness → clouded by illusion; clouded by illusion → const. awareness
constant awareness → tainted outlook; tainted outlook → const. awareness
The second contrapositive above is stated in correct answer choice (D). None of the other answer choices are supported by the stimulus.

[lbayliyeva@unm.edu]

Based from the answer online, it seems that "anyone who lives without constant awareness of the fragility and precariousness of human life" is a sufficient assumption. At the same time, "without" usually signals a necessary assumption, as it is being noted on page 2-61. Hence, why is "anyone who lives without constant awareness of the fragility and precariousness of human life" a sufficient assumption? How do I know when "without" signals necessary assumption or sufficient assumption?

[BethRibet]

Hi,

Thanks for writing.

Without, as well as except, until, or unless, will all modify necessary conditions. Ask yourself the question "without refers to what?". The answer in this case is: without "constant awareness...". So that's your necessary condition. Hope this helps!

Beth

[lbayliyeva@unm.edu]

In question 15, "without" seems to modify a sufficient condition because the homework explanation says:
"no constant awareness > clouded by illusion" We always place sufficient assumption first and then necessary assumption. In this instance, why "without" modifies a sufficient assumption?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi!

Try diagramming the statement using the Unless Equation (which also applies to until, except, and without):

1.) The condition modified by "without" goes on the necessary side of your diagram. "Without" modifies "constant awareness."

2.) The remaining condition is negated before it it put on your sufficient side. The remaining condition is "clouded by illusion." If we negate that, it becomes "not clouded by illusion." So:

NOT Clouded by Illusion Constant Awareness

Compare this diagram to the one in the explanations:

NO Constant Awareness Clouded by Illusion

Do you notice the relationship between the two diagrams? They are contrapositives! That means that they are logically equivalent to one another. So "without" does in fact modify the necessary condition. But when you take the contrapositive, you negate the necessary condition and move it to the sufficient side.

Ultimately, it does not matter whether you use the first diagram or the second diagram here. Since they are contrapositives, they are expressing the same relationship.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[Sherry001]

Hello ;
Could you please help me with my conditional linking for this question. I chose the right answer but I'm not confident in my linking of conditional arguments in general.

P1: any one who doesn't live without awareness to F & P --> has a mind clouded by illusion.
P2: people who are aware of F $ P -> taint their emotional outlook .

When I connect them I get this : which allows me to choose answer choice D as it connects the chain perfectly .

Don't taint their emotional outlook -> not aware of F $P --> have a mind clouded by illusion



* My issue is that sometimes I feel like I can link a chain more than one way. And if that does happened I'm afraid of missing out an answer choice. Here is another way I link the chain above.

Don't have a mind clouded by illusion -> have awareness of F & P -> tainted emotional outlook


Thanks
Sherry

[Robert Carroll]

Sherry,

Ultimately, your two chains (which are both great) are as follows:

mind clouded by illusion constant awareness of fragility and precariousness tainted emotional outlook

tainted emotional outlook constant awareness of fragility and precariousness mind clouded by illusion

One chain can be derived from the other just by taking the contrapositives of the constituent elements of the chain. You aren't in danger of missing an answer choice if you keep in mind that

mind clouded by illusion tainted emotional outlook

and

tainted emotional outlook mind clouded by illusion

are contrapositives of each other and equivalent conditionals. If you expect the answer choice to be one of them, be open to the possibility that it's instead the other - they mean the same thing so no meaning has been changed in the process.

If you always realize that any conditional implies its contrapositive, and that you may need to use the contrapositive instead of the original, you'll be ok in these situations.

Robert Carroll

[DrewKing]

Hello, I have read all the previous posts and it is still not clicking
I initially recognized the term "without" with modifies the necessary condition. In this case, "without" is modifying constant awareness..therefore I drew my diagram as :
1.Mind Clouded not constant aware. The CP is constant aware not mind clouded.

2.Constant aware tainted EO. The CP is not tainted EO not constant aware.

I try combining both and do not get answer D. (Not tainted EO mind clouded. or the CP)

*Also, I feel like i am wasting so much time doing CP on each and every condition. I feel as though i am totally confusing myself and now in a worse position than when i started this course. I'd appreciate any assistance you can provide, thank you.

[lsat2016]

Why is C wrong?
Isn't a "mind clouded by illusion" or a "mind tainted by their emotional outlook on experience" a type of self deception?

Thank you

[Clay Cooper]

Hi lsat2016,

Thanks for your question. I think you have spotted the issue here, but I also think that it's pretty clear that a mind clouded by illusion is not necessarily engaged in self-deception.

For example, if you lied to me about Bob and convinced me that Bob is a terrible person, I might be less willing to work with Bob or accept him as a friend. In that case, my mind would be clouded by illusion - the illusion that Bob is a bad person - not necessarily through any fault of my own. I think that illustrates that a mind clouded by illusion is not necessarily self-deceiving.

Similarly, Eeyore (from Winnie the Pooh) certainly has a tainted emotional outlook, but I don't remember any evidence of self-deception on his part.

In either case, self-deception is not necessarily present, and that is why C is wrong.