• Boinkage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    10 months ago

    No. It is equal to “if not B, then not A.” You’re welcome for doing your logic 101 homework for you.

    • monotremata@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Honestly what the homework is probably looking for is that it’s equivalent to “B or not A.” But yeah.

    • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Edit: I see the error in my below response. I leave wrong answers for conversational completeness

      That’s not equivalent either. “if not b, then not a” works if it’s a sequence but doesn’t work for options in which multiple inputs can lead to the same output. If you get pizza every Tuesday and Friday, then answering “what’s for lunch” with “if Tuesday, then pizza” and “if Friday, then pizza” doesn’t let it work in reverse. “what day is it” can’t be answered with “if pizza lunch, then Tuesday”

      • Boinkage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Ya wrong.

        If Tuesday, then pizza. And, if Friday, then pizza.

        The contrapositive : if not pizza, then not Tuesday and not Friday.

        What day is it? We’re not having pizza. So it’s not Tuesday or Friday.

        Google contrapositives then holla back

  • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    An example of why this is incorrrect.

    If a card is the ace of spades, it is black.

    A card is black if and only if it is the ace of spades.

    There are other conditions under which B (a card is black) can happen, so the second statement is not true.

    A conclusion that would be correct is “If a card is not black, it is not the ace of spades.”. The condition is that if A is true B will also always be true, so if B is false we can be sure that A is false as well - i.e. “If not B, not A”.

  • Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    If Nazi, then fascist = true

    Fascist, if and only Nazi = not true

    If car, then vehicle = true

    Vehicle if and only if car = not true

    • Lafari@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      If car, then vehicle = true

      Car if and only if vehicle = true.

      Is this correct?

      Therefore “If A then B” = “A if and only if B” (or “If B then A” = “B if and only if A”)?

      • zenharbinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        B can still be true when a is false. iff means that b can only be true when a is true.

        Also, the equivalent statement is.

        vehicle if and only if car.

        not

        car only if vehicle

        since a truck is a vehicle, the statement is false.

        Somewhat wrong above:

        A B a iff b

        T T T

        T F F

        F T F

        F F T

        look online for truth tables.

      • Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        You’d have to firm up your definition of car and vehicle before you could decide that one. Does a hot wheels car count as a car? Does a vehicle have to be large enough to move people or freight?

  • Apepollo11@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    10 months ago

    You’ve have some examples, but in case they are not clear enough:

    If [you have AIDS] then [you are unwell]

    [You are unwell] if and only if [you have AIDS]

    The first one is not the same as the second. Why? There are plenty of ways to be unwell, without necessary developing AIDS.

    The first statement only defines one possible path to B, not all of them.

      • BananaTrifleViolin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Actually a good example:

        • If you have AIDs (A) then you have HIV (B). True
        • You have HIV (B) if, and only if, you have AIDS (A). Not true
        • If you don’t have HIV (B), then you don’t have AIDs (A). True, and the actual inverse of “If A then B”; which is “If not B, then not A”
          • Boinkage@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Substitute common sense terms. If I say “if it is an apple, it is a fruit”, does it then follow that a thing is a fruit if and only if it is an apple? No. Lots of other things are fruit without being an apple.

            • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Better read that one again.

              “If B then A” … “B if and only if A”?

              If Apple then fruit. Is Apple ONLY if it’s a fruit.

              This one actually checks out.

              • Boinkage@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                If and only if is a biconditional. “b if and only if a” means “if b then a” AND “b only if a”. B only if A here means “It is an apple only if is a fruit”, in other words, “if it is a fruit, it could only be an apple.” Which ain’t right.

                B -> A (if B, then A) (if apple, then fruit, correct)

                B <-> A (B if and only if A) (if apple, then fruit, AND if fruit, then apple, incorrect).

                • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Gotcha. I was reading it aloud: “It’s an Apple if and only if it’s a fruit.” which isn’t wrong, but I guess the technical definition of “If and only if” assumes more than the words imply.

          • Casey_Masterpiece@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            If B then A is the same as if X then Y is the same as if A then B. They are saying it’s the same as the OP. Changing the letters around doesn’t change the meaning since the letters are just placeholders.

            Now if you said If A then B AND If B then A as one it wouldn’t be the same because A and B would have to keep the same meaning.

            • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              But they switched the order in only the first half of the statement. I don’t know if everyone commenting caught that.

              Is “If B then A” equal to “B if and only if A”?

              This IS different from the original question.

          • Thoth19@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I mean it is the definition of “if and only if”. And by commutativity we also know that A iff B is equal to B iff A

              • Thoth19@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yeah if vs iff can be confusing at first. Trying to understand it with normal grammar doesn’t work right. It’s a lot more helpful to grok the symbols and so the truth tables by hand to see how they fit together

  • flx
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    if youre doing homework, i recommend writing out truth tables for the statements and comparing, gives you a bit more insight into the statement truth conditions

  • Some_Dumb_Goat@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    If A, then B

    If Not B, then Not A

    If it’s raining then the grass is wet, but you can’t tell if it’s raining if the grass is wet, because of say, a hose or sprinkler.

    All that you can tell is that if the grass is dry, then it is not raining, and I that’s called a contrapositive.

  • Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    “If X is cat, then X is mammal” =?> “X is mammal if and only if X is cat”

    Obviously doesn’t hold: What if X doge?

  • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    No.

    B iff A is defined as “If B then A and if A then B”.

    If that doesn’t make it clear enough for you, then try writing out the truth table for both statements.

    • Lafari@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think I understand now, but what has left me scratching my nose (metaphorically):

      Why is it called “B if and only if A”, if what it really means is “B only if A and vice versa”? (Am I correct in thinking that’s what it means?)

      I just don’t understand how that translates grammatically. To me, “B if and only if A” sounds the same as “B only if A”. I can accept that they mean different things in the context of logic, just like I can assign any meaning to any label, like I could say that “dog” now means “kite” in a certain context. But it seems unintuitive and doesn’t really make sense to me. Does that make sense?

      • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        “B if and only if A” is a shorthand way to write “B if A and B only if A”. It’s like how “He is young and thin” means “He is young and he is thin”. We could write it the second way without trouble, but the first way is shorter, we agree that they mean the same thing, and we prefer to conserve energy when writing.

        The form “if and only if” is merely a convenient shorthand. Shorthand is usually more convenient for the writer than for the reader. 🤷‍♂️

        Imagine these natural language sentences and analyze how they are different:

        • I’ll go outside if it’s not snowing
        • I’ll go outside only if it’s not snowing

        Hint: what do you do in each case when it’s snowing?

      • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        “If A then B” means if A is true, then B is guaranteed to be true. Note that if B is true and A is false, “if A then B” is still true.

        “B only if A” means the only way for B to be true is for A to be true. It’s weird, but it has the inverse truth table as “(not A) and B”.