Which statement is logically equivalent to the following conditional statement? If it has five sides, then it is not an octagon.
I'm not good with this kind of stuff. I know it has something to do with contrapositives, but thats about all I understand on this.
Anyone?
Where are the list of choices?
If it is not an octagon, then it has five sides. If it does not have five sides, then it is not an octagon. If it does not have five sides, then it is an octagon. If it is an octagon, then it does not have five sides.
Which do you believe is the correct choice?
I'm just guessing here but I think it's the fourth one.
That's not even the contrapositive. This isn't exactly something that you can guess on.
Well, what is a contrapositive then?
Trying to understand here instead of asking for an answer.
1. In logic, contraposition is a law, which says that a conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. 2. The contrapositive of the statement has its antecedent and consequent inverted and flipped. 3. For instance, the proposition "All bats are mammals" can be restated as the conditional "If something is a bat, then it is a mammal". 4. Now, the law says that statement is identical to the contrapositive "If something is not a mammal, then it is not a bat."
Copied and pasted from Wikipedia
Okay so this question isn't looking for a contrapositive then is it?
Did you read all four sentences I posted above? Please read all four.
Okay, I read it all. So the question is asking to restate the original statement as an equivalent but different statement?
From what you read in those four sentences, what did you learn about a contrapositive statement?
That it is basically saying "if it is this, then it's not that" and vice versa?
You did not fully understand what you read. That much is clear.
Wait, is it saying if p then q = if -q then -p?
Are you there?
Hero?
Yes, that's what it's saying.
Okay, so in the choices given it would be number four? If it is an octagon, then it does not have five sides.
Actually, nevermind. You have it. I'm the one who read the original statement wrong. I thought it said something else, I'm not going to say what..
Yeah, I think it is number four. It follows that format if you place the subjects where the P's and Q's are.
Thanks, this really helps me. Thanks for helping me!
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!