How is the claim “I am in New York only if I am in America” the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?What is the difference between “necessary” and “sufficient”?What are the truth tables for “necessary” and “sufficient”?What is a good argument against “ad populum”?What distinguishes logical necessity, logical consequence, logical truth, and tautology from one another?Connectives, polarity and logical atoms in Linear logicPeirce's law, law of the excluded middle, and intuitionism.Syllogistic Logic: Negation of a Categorical Proposition?Are there exceptions to the principle of the excluded middle?How can you rewrite without any conditionals 'If A then B; A; therefore B' ?Formal Logic: Truth-Value AnalysisCan one think outside of logical rules? If so how?Modus Ponens as Substitute for Syllogism
Is it possible to do 50 km distance without any previous training?
Why are electrically insulating heatsinks so rare? Is it just cost?
How to regain access to running applications after accidentally zapping X.org?
Can I make popcorn with any corn?
What would happen to a modern skyscraper if it rains micro blackholes?
Operational amplifier as a comparator at high frequency
How is it possible to have an ability score that is less than 3?
Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?
What defenses are there against being summoned by the Gate spell?
Why "Having chlorophyll without photosynthesis is actually very dangerous" and "like living with a bomb"?
What is the word for reserving something for yourself before others do?
Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?
Why is Minecraft giving an OpenGL error?
Maximum likelihood parameters deviate from posterior distributions
Horror movie about a virus at the prom; beginning and end are stylized as a cartoon
Two films in a tank, only one comes out with a development error – why?
What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?
A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?
Mortgage Pre-approval / Loan - Apply Alone or with Fiancée?
Accidentally leaked the solution to an assignment, what to do now? (I'm the prof)
Question on branch cuts and branch points
Why is 150k or 200k jobs considered good when there's 300k+ births a month?
Was any UN Security Council vote triple-vetoed?
Uncaught TypeError: 'set' on proxy: trap returned falsish for property Name
How is the claim “I am in New York only if I am in America” the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?
What is the difference between “necessary” and “sufficient”?What are the truth tables for “necessary” and “sufficient”?What is a good argument against “ad populum”?What distinguishes logical necessity, logical consequence, logical truth, and tautology from one another?Connectives, polarity and logical atoms in Linear logicPeirce's law, law of the excluded middle, and intuitionism.Syllogistic Logic: Negation of a Categorical Proposition?Are there exceptions to the principle of the excluded middle?How can you rewrite without any conditionals 'If A then B; A; therefore B' ?Formal Logic: Truth-Value AnalysisCan one think outside of logical rules? If so how?Modus Ponens as Substitute for Syllogism
It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
It would make sense if "I am in America" is the antecedent and the consequent is the former.
Even though it wouldn't be sound, it would make logical sense.
I hope someone could explain it in a way someone would to a beginner in logic.
Thanks
logic
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 1 more comment
It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
It would make sense if "I am in America" is the antecedent and the consequent is the former.
Even though it wouldn't be sound, it would make logical sense.
I hope someone could explain it in a way someone would to a beginner in logic.
Thanks
logic
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
8
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
It would make sense if "I am in America" is the antecedent and the consequent is the former.
Even though it wouldn't be sound, it would make logical sense.
I hope someone could explain it in a way someone would to a beginner in logic.
Thanks
logic
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
It would make sense if "I am in America" is the antecedent and the consequent is the former.
Even though it wouldn't be sound, it would make logical sense.
I hope someone could explain it in a way someone would to a beginner in logic.
Thanks
logic
logic
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 7 hours ago
Frank Hubeny
9,87251554
9,87251554
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 9 hours ago
MinigameZ moreMinigameZ more
815
815
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
MinigameZ more is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
8
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
8
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago
1
1
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
8
8
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
Consider the sentence:
If I am in America then I am in New York.
One could make the antecedent, "I am in America", true by being in Chicago. But then the consequent, "I am in New York", would be false. So this conditional would be false unless we are given other information, such as travel plans, in addition to knowing that I am in America.
However, consider this sentence:
If I am in New York then I am in America.
Now whenever the antecedent, "I am in New York", is true, then so is the consequent, "I am in America". I don't need any additional information for that conditional to be true.
It would be similar for the following sentence:
I am in New York only if I am in America.
Here we are given that "I am in New York" and conclude that "I am in America". Except for English style this means the same as the previous sentence.
The authors of forall x provide a similar example using Paris and France in section "5.4 Condititional". They also provide this symbolization rule:
A sentence can be symbolized as A → B if it can be
paraphrased in English as ‘If A, then B’ or ‘A only if B’.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Fall 2018 bis. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
add a comment |
This is an example of the confusion inherent in switching between a natural language like English, and a formal language of logic.
The formulation
X only if Y
is rare in spoken English, but perfectly grammatical, and it typically has a logical meaning equivalent to
If X then Y
Both statements are saying you can't ever have X without Y. However, at first glance it looks closer to
If Y then X
which is entirely different. This represents how English has many different ways of saying the same thing (with incidental connotations and subtleties of meaning that are completely stripped out when you translate to a formal language).
add a comment |
"A only if B" and "if A, then B" mean the same.
The truth-condition for "if A, then B" excludes the case when A is True and B is False.
"A only if B" means that we cannot have A without B.
The two are equivalent.
See necessary and sufficient.
add a comment |
I see two interpretations of the sentence here. They mean logically different things. In both cases "only" is interpreted as "must be true and cannot be false".
I am in New York (only if I am in America).
If I am in New York, it can only be true that I am in America.
New York => America.
This is the interpretation everyone else is responding to. It is logically true.
I can be in (New York only) if I am in America.
If I am in America, then it can only be true that I am in New York.
America => New York.
This one is not logically true, you could be in Iowa.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
add a comment |
These claims have distinctly different connotations. From a pure formal-logic perspective, the "X only if Y" is equivalent to "Y or not X" which is the same as "X implies Y", which is the same as "if X then Y". However, natural language carries more information than its simple-minded reduction to predicate logic.
The second formulation "If I am in NY then I am in USA" sounds like a simple statement of a containment relationship: it implies that "I" am an unbound variable and informs the listener that NY is within the USA.
The first formulation connotes something about the speaker's mental state: he entertains the possibility (perhaps even likelihood) of being outside the USA in a place confusingly-similar to NY.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
The contrapositive of both statements is :
If I am not in America, then I cannot be in New York.
A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. It means both your statements are equivalent since they have the same contrapositive.
add a comment |
LOL - The two statements are not equivalent.
You could be in New York - Lazio - Italy
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
add a comment |
The statement makes no sense because it is inaccurate. There are multiple places named New York in multiple countries.
There are 7 places named New York in America.
There are 2 places named New York in Jamaica.
There is one place named New York in South Africa.
There is one place named New York in Singapore.
There is one place named New York in Mexico.
There is one place named New York in Italy.
There is one place named New York in Honduras.
There is one place named New York in United Kingdom.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "265"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
MinigameZ more is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphilosophy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61623%2fhow-is-the-claim-i-am-in-new-york-only-if-i-am-in-america-the-same-as-if-i-am%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Consider the sentence:
If I am in America then I am in New York.
One could make the antecedent, "I am in America", true by being in Chicago. But then the consequent, "I am in New York", would be false. So this conditional would be false unless we are given other information, such as travel plans, in addition to knowing that I am in America.
However, consider this sentence:
If I am in New York then I am in America.
Now whenever the antecedent, "I am in New York", is true, then so is the consequent, "I am in America". I don't need any additional information for that conditional to be true.
It would be similar for the following sentence:
I am in New York only if I am in America.
Here we are given that "I am in New York" and conclude that "I am in America". Except for English style this means the same as the previous sentence.
The authors of forall x provide a similar example using Paris and France in section "5.4 Condititional". They also provide this symbolization rule:
A sentence can be symbolized as A → B if it can be
paraphrased in English as ‘If A, then B’ or ‘A only if B’.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Fall 2018 bis. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
add a comment |
Consider the sentence:
If I am in America then I am in New York.
One could make the antecedent, "I am in America", true by being in Chicago. But then the consequent, "I am in New York", would be false. So this conditional would be false unless we are given other information, such as travel plans, in addition to knowing that I am in America.
However, consider this sentence:
If I am in New York then I am in America.
Now whenever the antecedent, "I am in New York", is true, then so is the consequent, "I am in America". I don't need any additional information for that conditional to be true.
It would be similar for the following sentence:
I am in New York only if I am in America.
Here we are given that "I am in New York" and conclude that "I am in America". Except for English style this means the same as the previous sentence.
The authors of forall x provide a similar example using Paris and France in section "5.4 Condititional". They also provide this symbolization rule:
A sentence can be symbolized as A → B if it can be
paraphrased in English as ‘If A, then B’ or ‘A only if B’.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Fall 2018 bis. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
add a comment |
Consider the sentence:
If I am in America then I am in New York.
One could make the antecedent, "I am in America", true by being in Chicago. But then the consequent, "I am in New York", would be false. So this conditional would be false unless we are given other information, such as travel plans, in addition to knowing that I am in America.
However, consider this sentence:
If I am in New York then I am in America.
Now whenever the antecedent, "I am in New York", is true, then so is the consequent, "I am in America". I don't need any additional information for that conditional to be true.
It would be similar for the following sentence:
I am in New York only if I am in America.
Here we are given that "I am in New York" and conclude that "I am in America". Except for English style this means the same as the previous sentence.
The authors of forall x provide a similar example using Paris and France in section "5.4 Condititional". They also provide this symbolization rule:
A sentence can be symbolized as A → B if it can be
paraphrased in English as ‘If A, then B’ or ‘A only if B’.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Fall 2018 bis. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/
Consider the sentence:
If I am in America then I am in New York.
One could make the antecedent, "I am in America", true by being in Chicago. But then the consequent, "I am in New York", would be false. So this conditional would be false unless we are given other information, such as travel plans, in addition to knowing that I am in America.
However, consider this sentence:
If I am in New York then I am in America.
Now whenever the antecedent, "I am in New York", is true, then so is the consequent, "I am in America". I don't need any additional information for that conditional to be true.
It would be similar for the following sentence:
I am in New York only if I am in America.
Here we are given that "I am in New York" and conclude that "I am in America". Except for English style this means the same as the previous sentence.
The authors of forall x provide a similar example using Paris and France in section "5.4 Condititional". They also provide this symbolization rule:
A sentence can be symbolized as A → B if it can be
paraphrased in English as ‘If A, then B’ or ‘A only if B’.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Fall 2018 bis. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/
answered 7 hours ago
Frank HubenyFrank Hubeny
9,87251554
9,87251554
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
add a comment |
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
This way of converting the sentence to logic does not do justice to the sentence's implications in English. The "only" version of the sentence could easily be read as "if and only if" (that is, a two-way implication).
– Brilliand
14 mins ago
add a comment |
This is an example of the confusion inherent in switching between a natural language like English, and a formal language of logic.
The formulation
X only if Y
is rare in spoken English, but perfectly grammatical, and it typically has a logical meaning equivalent to
If X then Y
Both statements are saying you can't ever have X without Y. However, at first glance it looks closer to
If Y then X
which is entirely different. This represents how English has many different ways of saying the same thing (with incidental connotations and subtleties of meaning that are completely stripped out when you translate to a formal language).
add a comment |
This is an example of the confusion inherent in switching between a natural language like English, and a formal language of logic.
The formulation
X only if Y
is rare in spoken English, but perfectly grammatical, and it typically has a logical meaning equivalent to
If X then Y
Both statements are saying you can't ever have X without Y. However, at first glance it looks closer to
If Y then X
which is entirely different. This represents how English has many different ways of saying the same thing (with incidental connotations and subtleties of meaning that are completely stripped out when you translate to a formal language).
add a comment |
This is an example of the confusion inherent in switching between a natural language like English, and a formal language of logic.
The formulation
X only if Y
is rare in spoken English, but perfectly grammatical, and it typically has a logical meaning equivalent to
If X then Y
Both statements are saying you can't ever have X without Y. However, at first glance it looks closer to
If Y then X
which is entirely different. This represents how English has many different ways of saying the same thing (with incidental connotations and subtleties of meaning that are completely stripped out when you translate to a formal language).
This is an example of the confusion inherent in switching between a natural language like English, and a formal language of logic.
The formulation
X only if Y
is rare in spoken English, but perfectly grammatical, and it typically has a logical meaning equivalent to
If X then Y
Both statements are saying you can't ever have X without Y. However, at first glance it looks closer to
If Y then X
which is entirely different. This represents how English has many different ways of saying the same thing (with incidental connotations and subtleties of meaning that are completely stripped out when you translate to a formal language).
answered 6 hours ago
Chris SunamiChris Sunami
21.1k12964
21.1k12964
add a comment |
add a comment |
"A only if B" and "if A, then B" mean the same.
The truth-condition for "if A, then B" excludes the case when A is True and B is False.
"A only if B" means that we cannot have A without B.
The two are equivalent.
See necessary and sufficient.
add a comment |
"A only if B" and "if A, then B" mean the same.
The truth-condition for "if A, then B" excludes the case when A is True and B is False.
"A only if B" means that we cannot have A without B.
The two are equivalent.
See necessary and sufficient.
add a comment |
"A only if B" and "if A, then B" mean the same.
The truth-condition for "if A, then B" excludes the case when A is True and B is False.
"A only if B" means that we cannot have A without B.
The two are equivalent.
See necessary and sufficient.
"A only if B" and "if A, then B" mean the same.
The truth-condition for "if A, then B" excludes the case when A is True and B is False.
"A only if B" means that we cannot have A without B.
The two are equivalent.
See necessary and sufficient.
edited 6 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
Mauro ALLEGRANZAMauro ALLEGRANZA
29.5k22065
29.5k22065
add a comment |
add a comment |
I see two interpretations of the sentence here. They mean logically different things. In both cases "only" is interpreted as "must be true and cannot be false".
I am in New York (only if I am in America).
If I am in New York, it can only be true that I am in America.
New York => America.
This is the interpretation everyone else is responding to. It is logically true.
I can be in (New York only) if I am in America.
If I am in America, then it can only be true that I am in New York.
America => New York.
This one is not logically true, you could be in Iowa.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
add a comment |
I see two interpretations of the sentence here. They mean logically different things. In both cases "only" is interpreted as "must be true and cannot be false".
I am in New York (only if I am in America).
If I am in New York, it can only be true that I am in America.
New York => America.
This is the interpretation everyone else is responding to. It is logically true.
I can be in (New York only) if I am in America.
If I am in America, then it can only be true that I am in New York.
America => New York.
This one is not logically true, you could be in Iowa.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
add a comment |
I see two interpretations of the sentence here. They mean logically different things. In both cases "only" is interpreted as "must be true and cannot be false".
I am in New York (only if I am in America).
If I am in New York, it can only be true that I am in America.
New York => America.
This is the interpretation everyone else is responding to. It is logically true.
I can be in (New York only) if I am in America.
If I am in America, then it can only be true that I am in New York.
America => New York.
This one is not logically true, you could be in Iowa.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I see two interpretations of the sentence here. They mean logically different things. In both cases "only" is interpreted as "must be true and cannot be false".
I am in New York (only if I am in America).
If I am in New York, it can only be true that I am in America.
New York => America.
This is the interpretation everyone else is responding to. It is logically true.
I can be in (New York only) if I am in America.
If I am in America, then it can only be true that I am in New York.
America => New York.
This one is not logically true, you could be in Iowa.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 hours ago
usulusul
1212
1212
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
usul is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
add a comment |
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
My reading of the OP's first sentence could be paraphrased as "I am in New York, unless I am not in America". It's logically equivalent to your second version, I think, although reads like a statement about a particular person rather than a general statement about everyone.
– Brilliand
18 mins ago
add a comment |
These claims have distinctly different connotations. From a pure formal-logic perspective, the "X only if Y" is equivalent to "Y or not X" which is the same as "X implies Y", which is the same as "if X then Y". However, natural language carries more information than its simple-minded reduction to predicate logic.
The second formulation "If I am in NY then I am in USA" sounds like a simple statement of a containment relationship: it implies that "I" am an unbound variable and informs the listener that NY is within the USA.
The first formulation connotes something about the speaker's mental state: he entertains the possibility (perhaps even likelihood) of being outside the USA in a place confusingly-similar to NY.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
These claims have distinctly different connotations. From a pure formal-logic perspective, the "X only if Y" is equivalent to "Y or not X" which is the same as "X implies Y", which is the same as "if X then Y". However, natural language carries more information than its simple-minded reduction to predicate logic.
The second formulation "If I am in NY then I am in USA" sounds like a simple statement of a containment relationship: it implies that "I" am an unbound variable and informs the listener that NY is within the USA.
The first formulation connotes something about the speaker's mental state: he entertains the possibility (perhaps even likelihood) of being outside the USA in a place confusingly-similar to NY.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
These claims have distinctly different connotations. From a pure formal-logic perspective, the "X only if Y" is equivalent to "Y or not X" which is the same as "X implies Y", which is the same as "if X then Y". However, natural language carries more information than its simple-minded reduction to predicate logic.
The second formulation "If I am in NY then I am in USA" sounds like a simple statement of a containment relationship: it implies that "I" am an unbound variable and informs the listener that NY is within the USA.
The first formulation connotes something about the speaker's mental state: he entertains the possibility (perhaps even likelihood) of being outside the USA in a place confusingly-similar to NY.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
These claims have distinctly different connotations. From a pure formal-logic perspective, the "X only if Y" is equivalent to "Y or not X" which is the same as "X implies Y", which is the same as "if X then Y". However, natural language carries more information than its simple-minded reduction to predicate logic.
The second formulation "If I am in NY then I am in USA" sounds like a simple statement of a containment relationship: it implies that "I" am an unbound variable and informs the listener that NY is within the USA.
The first formulation connotes something about the speaker's mental state: he entertains the possibility (perhaps even likelihood) of being outside the USA in a place confusingly-similar to NY.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
IanIan
1112
1112
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ian is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
The contrapositive of both statements is :
If I am not in America, then I cannot be in New York.
A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. It means both your statements are equivalent since they have the same contrapositive.
add a comment |
The contrapositive of both statements is :
If I am not in America, then I cannot be in New York.
A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. It means both your statements are equivalent since they have the same contrapositive.
add a comment |
The contrapositive of both statements is :
If I am not in America, then I cannot be in New York.
A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. It means both your statements are equivalent since they have the same contrapositive.
The contrapositive of both statements is :
If I am not in America, then I cannot be in New York.
A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive. It means both your statements are equivalent since they have the same contrapositive.
answered 44 mins ago
Eric DuminilEric Duminil
90649
90649
add a comment |
add a comment |
LOL - The two statements are not equivalent.
You could be in New York - Lazio - Italy
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
add a comment |
LOL - The two statements are not equivalent.
You could be in New York - Lazio - Italy
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
add a comment |
LOL - The two statements are not equivalent.
You could be in New York - Lazio - Italy
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
LOL - The two statements are not equivalent.
You could be in New York - Lazio - Italy
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 58 mins ago
MaxWMaxW
91
91
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
MaxW is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
add a comment |
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
That means that "If I'm in New York then I'm in America" is false, but it doesn't mean that it's not equivalent to "I'm in New York only if I'm in America".
– Eliran
23 mins ago
add a comment |
The statement makes no sense because it is inaccurate. There are multiple places named New York in multiple countries.
There are 7 places named New York in America.
There are 2 places named New York in Jamaica.
There is one place named New York in South Africa.
There is one place named New York in Singapore.
There is one place named New York in Mexico.
There is one place named New York in Italy.
There is one place named New York in Honduras.
There is one place named New York in United Kingdom.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
add a comment |
The statement makes no sense because it is inaccurate. There are multiple places named New York in multiple countries.
There are 7 places named New York in America.
There are 2 places named New York in Jamaica.
There is one place named New York in South Africa.
There is one place named New York in Singapore.
There is one place named New York in Mexico.
There is one place named New York in Italy.
There is one place named New York in Honduras.
There is one place named New York in United Kingdom.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
add a comment |
The statement makes no sense because it is inaccurate. There are multiple places named New York in multiple countries.
There are 7 places named New York in America.
There are 2 places named New York in Jamaica.
There is one place named New York in South Africa.
There is one place named New York in Singapore.
There is one place named New York in Mexico.
There is one place named New York in Italy.
There is one place named New York in Honduras.
There is one place named New York in United Kingdom.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The statement makes no sense because it is inaccurate. There are multiple places named New York in multiple countries.
There are 7 places named New York in America.
There are 2 places named New York in Jamaica.
There is one place named New York in South Africa.
There is one place named New York in Singapore.
There is one place named New York in Mexico.
There is one place named New York in Italy.
There is one place named New York in Honduras.
There is one place named New York in United Kingdom.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 20 mins ago
StevetechStevetech
101
101
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Stevetech is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
add a comment |
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
The question is why "if A then B" is considered equivalent to "A only if B". Whether or not the original statement about New York is true is irrelevant.
– Eliran
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
Except it isn’t because the premise is wrong
– Stevetech
14 mins ago
add a comment |
MinigameZ more is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MinigameZ more is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MinigameZ more is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MinigameZ more is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Philosophy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphilosophy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61623%2fhow-is-the-claim-i-am-in-new-york-only-if-i-am-in-america-the-same-as-if-i-am%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Already discussed many times on this site; see e.g. what-is-the-difference-between-necessary-and-sufficient as well as what-are-the-truth-tables-for-necessary-and-sufficient
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
8 hours ago
I made an edit which you may roll back or further edit.
– Frank Hubeny
7 hours ago
8
Are you perhaps interpreting the word "only" to be qualifying New York? A comma would help to clarify, as would an appropriate pause in the spoken sentence. In other words, do you understand this sentence to be "I am in New York, only if I am in America" or "I am in New York only, if I am in America." If you understood it to be the latter, then I agree that it is illogical. If you understood it to be the former, then hopefully the existing answers have helped you.
– Richard II
5 hours ago
Technically if you were in New York you might be in a foreign embassy and not in "America"
– Mark Schultheiss
1 hour ago
@MarkSchultheiss To take your technicality futher, are you still in new york if you are in an embassy? Is yes, then you are also in america (as you are saying the politics are irrelevant). If no, then you are also NOT in america
– user34150
1 hour ago