Talk:Inverse (logic)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

See archived discussion at Talk:Inverse (logic)/Archive

Improving the poor example

The article read,

the inverse of a conditional cannot be inferred from the conditional. For example, "If it's not raining, then Sam will not meet Jack at the movies" cannot be inferred from "If it's raining, then Sam will meet Jack at the movies." It could easily be the case that Sam and Jack are attending the movies no matter the weather.

This is a poor example, because to suggest that they will attend the movies no matter the weather makes the "if it's raining" clause irrelevant and arguably misleading. No one would include that clause if they intend to attend no matter the weather.

Explaining that the inference is not valid because additional conditions might be imposed on the "not raining" case – as I just did – is a much better example. Novel compound (talk) 17:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]