An example of why this is wrong.
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 be true, So if B is false we can be sure that A is false as well - i.e. “If not B, not A”.
Boinkage@lemmy.world 11 months ago
No. It is equal to “if not B, then not A.” You’re welcome for doing your logic 101 homework for you.
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 11 months ago
First thing I thought lmao. Somebody is taking logic
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 11 months ago
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 11 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.
pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 11 months ago
You left out the “not” part - “If not pizza lunch, then not Tuesday” does indeed work.
kogasa@programming.dev 11 months ago
Using standard definitions from propositional logic they are equivalent.
monotremata@kbin.social 11 months ago
Honestly what the homework is probably looking for is that it's equivalent to "B or not A." But yeah.