Question

Difficulty: MediumChaining Conditional Statements

A city planning commission is establishing the zoning regulations for a new urban district. Match each set of proposed conditional zoning rules with the logically valid deduction that must follow from those rules.

  • If a district approves retail zoning, it must require public parking facilities. Moreover, any district that requires public parking facilities must contain a subway station.Any district that lacks a subway station cannot approve retail zoning.
  • If a district approves retail zoning, it cannot require public parking facilities. Any district that does not require public parking facilities is ineligible to contain a subway station.If a district contains a subway station, it must reject retail zoning.
  • If a district rejects retail zoning, it is forced to require public parking facilities. Furthermore, a district can require public parking facilities only if it contains a subway station.Any district that lacks a subway station is guaranteed to approve retail zoning.
  • A district will contain a subway station only if it requires public parking facilities. Whenever a district requires public parking facilities, it is guaranteed to approve retail zoning.If a district rejects retail zoning, it cannot contain a subway station.

Answer

The correct matches map each set of conditional premises to its validly chained contrapositive. Left 1 maps to Right 1; Left 2 maps to Right 2; Left 3 maps to Right 3; Left 4 maps to Right 4.
Each correct pair requires diagramming the two explicit premises, connecting them via their shared term to form a transitive chain, and then identifying the contrapositive of that full chain among the available deductions.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Translate the first set of rules into formal logic.
Retail -> Parking; Parking -> Subway. Chain: Retail -> Subway.
Establishing the base conditional chain allows for valid deductions.
2
Derive the contrapositive for the first chain to find its match.
Not Subway -> Not Retail. This matches the rule stating a district lacking a subway cannot approve retail.
The direct chain (Retail -> Subway) does not appear in the options, so the valid inference must be its contrapositive.
3
Translate and chain the remaining rule sets, paying attention to negative terms and 'only if' indicators.
Left 2 yields Retail -> Not Subway. Left 3 yields Reject Retail -> Subway. Left 4 yields Subway -> Retail.
Terms like 'only if' always introduce necessary conditions, placing them on the right side of the conditional arrow.
4
Find the contrapositive for each remaining chain to complete the matches.
Left 2 contrapositive: Subway -> Reject Retail. Left 3 contrapositive: Not Subway -> Approve Retail. Left 4 contrapositive: Reject Retail -> Not Subway.
Matching the derived contrapositives perfectly aligns the rule sets with their logical deductions in the options.

Key Concept

Chaining Conditional Statements and Contrapositives
Rate this question