From: DJNordlund@aol.com
Date: Thu Jun 28 2001 - 21:17:49 EDT
<x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:00 EDT
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica>In a message dated 6/28/2001 1:14:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<BR>rickstamp@gmx.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>>I have seen it stated that it is a logical fallacy when one assumes that a >
<BR>conditional statement is also true in the reverse as in "If A, then B is not
<BR>equal to
<BR>>if non-A, then non-B) as described by Wallace on page 687. Could one also >
<BR>state that this is also the case for "if not B then not A"? Assume a third
<BR>class >conditional with EAN + subjunctive followed by an apodosis in the
<BR>future.
<BR>
<BR>>Sincerely,
<BR>>Rick Stamp
<BR>
<BR>Rick,
<BR>
<BR>when you have a valid implication such as
<BR>
<BR> (1) if A then B
<BR>
<BR>you are correct in understanding that it is NOT logically valid to claim
<BR>
<BR> (2) if not-A then not-B
<BR>
<BR>However, if (1) above is valid, then it IS valid to conclude
<BR>
<BR> (3) if not-B then not-A
<BR>
<BR>regardless of the Greek you are analyzing.
<BR>
<BR>Hope this is helpful,
<BR>
<BR>Dan Nordlund
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>
<BR></FONT>
---<BR>
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]<BR>
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
<BR>
</html>
</x-html>