# Can somebody shed some light on this conditional controversy?

#### doug800

##### Can somebody shed some light on this conditional controversy?
« on: September 20, 2005, 11:17:28 AM »
I saw this commercial and it involved a condtional statement, so, just for kicks, I thought I'd diagram it.  It's led to confusion.

Commercial basically concludes with:
Chances are, if you don't know (the name), we probably do

I diagram as:
You don't know ---> We probably do

The contrapositive:
~We probably do ---> ~You don't know
OR
We probably don't ---> You do know

The contrapositive is supposed to, in essence, be saying the same thing as the original statement.  When I read the contrapositive, it seems to be indicating something different.

Any help?

#### r.

• 1053
• Hey psycho stalker spy!
##### Re: Can somebody shed some light on this conditional controversy?
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2005, 11:21:08 AM »
Well the whole thing is ruined by teh "Chances are" preface. Basically, when it is left to chance, anything can happen...thus, conditions are worthless.

#### River

• 359
##### Re: Can somebody shed some light on this conditional controversy?
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2005, 11:31:15 AM »
Commercial basically concludes with:
Chances are, if you don't know (the name), we probably do
=Here the"chances" means possibility, so the possibility for us to know depends on your not knowing.
=if you do not know----the possibility for us to know is better(higher)
Contra: if the possibility for us to know is worse(or lower)---you know

Yet, without the full text of argument, it is hard to diagram it completely.

#### XYZZY

##### Re: Can somebody shed some light on this conditional controversy?
« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2005, 11:36:52 AM »

You have to think of it in terms of sufficient and necessary.

if sufficient then necessary.