Forming Contrapositives

22 soru

Soru 1Soru →

In an effort to promote sustainable industrial practices, the regional council has updated its environmental protection statutes. Under the new guidelines, a manufacturing facility is exempt from the annual carbon surcharge only if it relies primarily on renewable energy sources and does not discharge unmonitored effluent into adjacent waterways.

Which statement is logically equivalent to the principle governing the carbon surcharge exemption?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a manufacturing facility either does not rely primarily on renewable energy sources or discharges unmonitored effluent into adjacent waterways, then it is not exempt from the annual carbon surcharge.

Cevap

The statement asserting that if a manufacturing facility either does not rely primarily on renewable energy sources or discharges unmonitored effluent into adjacent waterways, then it is not exempt from the annual carbon surcharge.
The correct answer accurately forms the contrapositive of the principle in the stimulus. The stimulus establishes a conditional relationship where being exempt from the surcharge requires two necessary conditions: relying on renewable energy AND not discharging unmonitored effluent. To form the logically valid contrapositive, we must reverse the conditions and negate them. Negating a compound condition joined by 'and' requires applying De Morgan's laws, changing the 'and' to 'or' while negating both individual terms. Thus, the condition becomes 'does not rely on renewable energy OR discharges unmonitored effluent'. Placing this in the sufficient condition yields a statement that perfectly matches the correct option.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the logical structure of the stimulus to identify the sufficient and necessary conditions.
Sufficient condition: Exempt from surcharge. Necessary condition: (Relies on renewable energy AND Does not discharge unmonitored effluent).
The phrase 'only if' introduces a necessary condition. Accurate baseline translation is required before manipulating the logic.
2
Begin forming the contrapositive by reversing the positions of the conditions and negating both sides.
NOT (Relies on renewable energy AND Does not discharge unmonitored effluent) -> NOT Exempt from surcharge.
A conditional statement is always logically equivalent to its contrapositive, which requires both reversal and negation.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to simplify the negated compound necessary condition.
The negated condition becomes: '(Does NOT rely on renewable energy OR DOES discharge unmonitored effluent)'.
De Morgan's laws state that the negation of an 'AND' statement becomes an 'OR' statement where both individual terms are negated.
4
Combine the simplified terms to state the final, logically equivalent conditional statement.
If a facility does NOT rely on renewable energy OR it DOES discharge unmonitored effluent -> it is NOT exempt from the surcharge.
This completes the formation of the logically valid contrapositive, leading directly to the correct answer choice.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives of Compound Conditionals using De Morgan's Laws
Soru 2Soru →

According to the newly ratified Outer Space Mining Treaty, securing a commercial extraction license on the lunar surface requires that a corporation either establish an autonomous life-support habitat or formally partner with a state-sponsored space agency.

Which one of the following statements logically follows from the treaty's requirement?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a corporation neither establishes an autonomous life-support habitat nor formally partners with a state-sponsored space agency, it will not secure a commercial extraction license on the lunar surface.

Cevap

The statement that logically follows is: 'If a corporation neither establishes an autonomous life-support habitat nor formally partners with a state-sponsored space agency, it will not secure a commercial extraction license on the lunar surface.'
The correct answer accurately applies formal logic and De Morgan's laws to create a valid contrapositive. The original premise dictates: License → (Habitat OR Partner). The contrapositive requires reversing the direction and negating both sides. Crucially, negating an 'OR' statement transforms it into an 'AND' statement. Therefore, the valid inference is: If NOT Habitat AND NOT Partner (phrased as 'neither... nor'), then NOT License.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the logical structure of the original rule in the stimulus.
Sufficient condition: Securing a commercial extraction license. Necessary condition: Establishing a habitat OR partnering with a space agency.
Mapping the exact formal logic relationship is required before evaluating conditional deductions.
2
Formulate the logical contrapositive of the rule.
To find the contrapositive, reverse the terms and negate both sides. Negating the 'OR' statement requires De Morgan's laws: 'NOT (Habitat OR Partner)' becomes 'NOT Habitat AND NOT Partner'.
The only statement that definitively must be true based on a conditional premise is its logically valid contrapositive.
3
Match the formulated contrapositive to the answer choices.
The correct deduction is: If a corporation does NOT establish a habitat AND does NOT partner with an agency (neither... nor), then it CANNOT secure a license.
This eliminates choices that contain formal logical fallacies such as mistaken reversals, mistaken negations, or incomplete applications of De Morgan's laws.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming valid contrapositives from compound conditional statements using De Morgan's laws.
Soru 3Soru →

Under the revised 2026 Bioethics Commission guidelines, a cognitive enhancement implant can be approved for general public distribution only if the device has been demonstrated to have zero risk of inducing memory degradation, and it either significantly improves executive function or radically accelerates neural plasticity.

Which one of the following logically follows from the guidelines above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a cognitive enhancement implant carries any risk of inducing memory degradation, or if it neither significantly improves executive function nor radically accelerates neural plasticity, it cannot be approved for general public distribution.

Cevap

The correct answer states that if an implant carries any risk of inducing memory degradation, or if it neither improves executive function nor accelerates neural plasticity, it cannot be approved.
The stimulus establishes a complex conditional relationship: Approval -> Zero Risk AND (Executive Function OR Neural Plasticity). To find what logically follows, we must find the contrapositive. According to formal logic and De Morgan's laws, we reverse the terms and negate them, flipping 'AND' to 'OR' and 'OR' to 'AND'. The negation of 'Zero Risk' is 'any risk'. The negation of the 'AND' is an 'OR'. The negation of '(Executive Function OR Neural Plasticity)' is 'neither Executive Function nor Neural Plasticity'. Putting this together creates the correct sufficient condition: 'any risk OR (neither Executive Function nor Neural Plasticity)'. This triggers the negated outcome: 'cannot be approved'. The correct option perfectly mirrors this structure.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions in the stimulus.
Sufficient (A): Approved for distribution. Necessary: Zero risk of memory degradation (Z) AND [Improves executive function (E) OR Accelerates neural plasticity (N)].
The phrase 'only if' introduces necessary conditions. Everything preceding 'only if' is the sufficient condition.
2
Symbolize the formal logic relationship.
A -> Z AND (E OR N).
Abstracting the text into logic symbols helps isolate the structure needed to form the contrapositive.
3
Form the contrapositive by negating both sides and reversing the arrow.
NOT [Z AND (E OR N)] -> NOT A.
The contrapositive is the only definitively true deduction that can be made from a universal conditional statement.
4
Apply De Morgan's laws to simplify the negated compound necessary condition.
The negation of 'Z AND (E OR N)' becomes 'NOT Z OR NOT (E OR N)'. Further applying De Morgan's to the inner condition yields 'NOT Z OR (NOT E AND NOT N)'.
De Morgan's laws dictate that when negating a compound statement, 'AND' changes to 'OR', and 'OR' changes to 'AND'.
5
Translate the simplified logical contrapositive back into English.
If an implant does not have zero risk (has ANY risk), OR if it lacks both benefits (NEITHER significantly improves E NOR radically accelerates N), then it cannot be approved (NOT A).
This translation matches the correct answer choice perfectly.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming complex contrapositives using De Morgan's laws
Soru 4Soru →

Match each excerpt from the newly proposed clinical bioethics regulatory framework (left) with its logically equivalent contrapositive statement (right).

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

A therapy qualifies for expedited bioethics review only if it targets a terminal condition and has no viable alternatives.
Unless an applicant demonstrates both a compelling medical need and an absence of financial coercion, their participation in the clinical trial will be denied.
Implementation of the neural biofeedback mechanism requires that the software either undergoes independent auditing or is developed internally by the core research team.
Publishing the trial data prematurely is sufficient to both invalidate the patent application and permanently disqualify the researchers from future grants.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct mapping identifies the formal contrapositive of each conditional statement, properly applying De Morgan's Laws to compound conditions and accurately translating complex conditional indicators such as 'unless', 'requires', and 'only if'.
Each correctly paired item accurately translates the formal logic of the original natural language statement, identifies the sufficient and necessary conditions, reverses their order, and negates both sides. Where compound statements are involved, De Morgan's Laws are applied flawlessly to swap conjunctions ('and') with disjunctions ('or').

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the 'only if' statement regarding expedited bioethics review.
Matches with the statement concluding that the therapy is ineligible.
'Only if' introduces necessary conditions (Terminal AND No Alternatives). Negating and reversing via De Morgan's Law results in 'Not Terminal OR Has Alternatives -> Ineligible'.
2
Analyze the 'unless' statement regarding clinical trial participation.
Matches with the statement beginning 'Any applicant whose participation... is permitted'.
'Unless X, Y' means 'If Not X, Y'. Here, 'If Not (Need AND Absence of Coercion) -> Denied'. The contrapositive is 'If Not Denied (Permitted) -> Need AND Absence of Coercion'.
3
Analyze the 'requires' statement regarding the biofeedback mechanism.
Matches with the statement beginning 'Whenever the software lacks independent auditing and has not been developed internally'.
'Requires' introduces a necessary compound condition (Auditing OR Internal). Reversing and negating flips OR to AND: 'NOT Auditing AND NOT Internal -> NOT Implemented'.
4
Analyze the 'sufficient' statement regarding premature publication.
Matches with the statement beginning 'If the researchers are not permanently disqualified... or the patent... is not invalidated'.
'Sufficient' introduces the sufficient condition. Premature -> (Invalidate AND Disqualify). Reversing and negating flips AND to OR: '(NOT Disqualify OR NOT Invalidate) -> NOT Premature'.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming contrapositives of compound conditional statements using De Morgan's Laws.
Soru 5Soru →

The mind-body problem has plagued philosophers for centuries, generating countless theoretical models. According to Dr. Varma’s latest treatise on cognitive ontology, however, most of these models are fundamentally flawed. Varma argues that a philosophical framework can successfully resolve the mind-body problem only if it discards strict substance dualism and either embraces panpsychism or redefines consciousness as an emergent physical property.

Which one of the following statements logically follows from Dr. Varma’s claims?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a philosophical framework fails to discard strict substance dualism, or if it neither embraces panpsychism nor redefines consciousness as an emergent physical property, then it cannot successfully resolve the mind-body problem.

Cevap

The statement indicating that a framework cannot successfully resolve the problem if it fails to discard strict substance dualism, or if it neither embraces panpsychism nor redefines consciousness.
This statement correctly applies the contrapositive and De Morgan's laws to the stimulus. The original rule is: Resolve -> Discard Dualism AND (Panpsychism OR Emergent). The contrapositive negates and reverses this: If NOT Discard Dualism, OR if NOT (Panpsychism OR Emergent), then NOT Resolve. Negating 'Panpsychism OR Emergent' results in 'NOT Panpsychism AND NOT Emergent' (which is written as 'neither... nor...').

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Translate the rule from the stimulus into formal logic.
Resolve Mind-Body (R) -> Discard Dualism (D) AND [Embrace Panpsychism (P) OR Redefine Consciousness (E)]
The phrase 'only if' introduces a necessary condition, which in this case is a compound condition requiring 'D' alongside at least one of 'P' or 'E'.
2
Determine the logical task required by the question stem.
Formulate the contrapositive of the identified conditional rule.
The question asks what logically follows from a definitive conditional statement. In this format, the correct answer almost always represents the valid contrapositive.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to the primary conjunction (AND).
NOT D OR NOT [P OR E] -> NOT R
To negate an 'AND' statement when forming a contrapositive, you must negate both individual components and change the 'AND' to an 'OR'.
4
Apply De Morgan's laws a second time to the nested disjunction (OR).
NOT D OR [NOT P AND NOT E] -> NOT R (meaning: If NOT D, or if neither P nor E, then NOT R).
To negate the inner 'OR' statement, you must negate both 'P' and 'E' and change the 'OR' to an 'AND'. 'NOT P AND NOT E' translates smoothly to 'neither P nor E'.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming valid contrapositives using De Morgan's laws on complex, compound conditional statements.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 6Soru →

Match each conditional statement regarding corporate merger regulations on the left with its logically valid contrapositive on the right.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

The merger will be approved only if the antitrust division grants clearance and the competing firm withdraws its lawsuit.
Approval of the merger requires that the antitrust division grants clearance or the competing firm withdraws its lawsuit.
The merger is guaranteed to be approved if the antitrust division grants clearance and the competing firm withdraws its lawsuit.
The antitrust division granting clearance or the competing firm withdrawing its lawsuit is sufficient for the merger to be approved.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The logically valid pairs map combinations of necessary/sufficient conditions with their De Morgan's Law contrapositives. 'Approved only if... and...' pairs with 'If not... or not..., not approved'. 'Requires that... or...' pairs with 'If fails to... and refuses to..., not approved'. 'Guaranteed to be approved if... and...' pairs with 'If not approved, then either not... or not...'. '...or... is sufficient for' pairs with 'If not approved, it must be that failed to... and failed to...'.
Each correct pair properly executes the two mandatory steps of forming a complex contrapositive: (1) flipping the necessary and sufficient conditions while negating both sides, and (2) applying De Morgan's Laws to switch any negated 'AND' operator to an 'OR' operator, and vice versa.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Define variables for the three propositions to systematically evaluate the logical structures without relying on English syntax.
Let M = 'Merger is approved'. Let C = 'Antitrust division grants clearance'. Let W = 'Competing firm withdraws lawsuit'.
Using symbolic logic prevents confusion caused by complex phrasing and varied conditional trigger words (only if, requires, sufficient, guaranteed).
2
Translate the four left-side conditional statements into formal logic.
Statement 1: M → (C and W). Statement 2: M → (C or W). Statement 3: (C and W) → M. Statement 4: (C or W) → M.
Accurately identifying necessary versus sufficient conditions is mandatory before forming a contrapositive.
3
Form the logically valid contrapositive for each translated statement by reversing the arrow and negating both sides.
Contrapositive 1: ~(C and W) → ~M. Contrapositive 2: ~(C or W) → ~M. Contrapositive 3: ~M → ~(C and W). Contrapositive 4: ~M → ~(C or W).
The contrapositive is the only inherently valid inference that can be drawn from a standard conditional statement.
4
Apply De Morgan's Laws to distribute the negations across the compound 'AND' / 'OR' conditions.
Contrapositive 1: (~C or ~W) → ~M. Contrapositive 2: (~C and ~W) → ~M. Contrapositive 3: ~M → (~C or ~W). Contrapositive 4: ~M → (~C and ~W). These directly map to the four statements on the right.
Negating a conjunction (AND) always yields a disjunction (OR), and negating a disjunction yields a conjunction.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Complex Contrapositives using De Morgan's Laws
Soru 7Soru →

According to the newly established directives by the Orbital Commerce Commission, a commercial satellite launch qualifies for priority scheduling only if the launching corporation submits a comprehensive debris mitigation plan and at least one of the following occurs: the payload serves a registered humanitarian function, or an independent aerospace auditor certifies the vehicle's structural integrity.

Which of the following statements must be logically true based on the directives above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a launching corporation fails to submit a comprehensive debris mitigation plan, or if both the payload does not serve a registered humanitarian function and an independent aerospace auditor fails to certify the vehicle's structural integrity, then the commercial satellite launch will not qualify for priority scheduling.

Cevap

If a launching corporation fails to submit a comprehensive debris mitigation plan, or if both the payload does not serve a registered humanitarian function and an independent aerospace auditor fails to certify the vehicle's structural integrity, then the commercial satellite launch will not qualify for priority scheduling.
The correct answer accurately applies the contrapositive to a compound conditional. The stimulus dictates that for a launch to qualify, it needs a mitigation plan AND at least one of two other factors (humanitarian function OR auditor certification). If it lacks the mitigation plan, it fails. Alternatively, if it lacks BOTH of the other factors, it fails. The correct choice perfectly captures this dynamic.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the stimulus into formal conditional logic.
Priority Scheduling (P) → Mitigation Plan (M) AND [Humanitarian Function (H) OR Auditor Certification (A)].
Accurately representing the necessary conditions is required before attempting to find the contrapositive.
2
Apply the process of forming a contrapositive by reversing and negating the terms.
NOT {Mitigation Plan (M) AND [Humanitarian Function (H) OR Auditor Certification (A)]} → NOT Priority Scheduling (P).
The logically valid inference from any conditional statement is its contrapositive.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to properly negate the compound necessary condition.
The negation of 'M AND (H OR A)' becomes 'NOT M OR NOT (H OR A)'. Applying De Morgan's again to the inner bracket yields 'NOT M OR (NOT H AND NOT A)'.
Negating an 'AND' requires switching it to an 'OR', and negating an 'OR' requires switching it to an 'AND'.
4
Translate the final logical notation back into natural language.
If the corporation does not submit a plan (NOT M), OR if the payload lacks a humanitarian function AND the auditor fails to certify (NOT H AND NOT A), then the launch does not get priority scheduling (NOT P).
The correct answer choice will mirror this exact logical relationship without confusing necessary and sufficient conditions.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming contrapositives of compound conditional statements using De Morgan's laws.
Soru 8Soru →

The university's graduate committee has recently updated the financial aid regulations for all incoming and returning students. The new guidelines establish strict conditions for the most prestigious awards. According to the official policy, being awarded the Chancellor's Fellowship requires that a student receive a full tuition waiver and be granted a monthly research stipend.

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a student does not receive a full tuition waiver or is not granted a monthly research stipend, then that student is not awarded the Chancellor's Fellowship.

Cevap

If a student does not receive a full tuition waiver or is not granted a monthly research stipend, then that student is not awarded the Chancellor's Fellowship.
The correct answer accurately forms the contrapositive of the compound conditional statement in the stimulus. The original statement establishes that the Chancellor's Fellowship is sufficient to guarantee both a full tuition waiver and a monthly research stipend (Fellowship -> Waiver AND Stipend). To form the logically valid contrapositive, we must negate the necessary conditions and reverse the direction of the arrow. According to De Morgan's laws, negating an 'AND' statement creates an 'OR' statement. Therefore, lacking either a full tuition waiver or a monthly research stipend is sufficient to conclude that the student was not awarded the Chancellor's Fellowship.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the formal conditional relationship presented in the stimulus.
The stimulus uses the word 'requires' to introduce necessary conditions. The relationship is: Chancellor's Fellowship -> Full tuition waiver AND Monthly research stipend.
Extracting the formal logical structure from the text is the necessary first step to determine what logically follows.
2
Apply the rules of formal logic to construct the contrapositive of the statement.
To form the contrapositive, reverse the terms and negate them. The negation of 'Waiver AND Stipend' requires applying De Morgan's laws, becoming 'Not Waiver OR Not Stipend'.
The contrapositive is the only conditional statement that is logically equivalent to the original statement.
3
Combine the reversed and negated terms to form the final deduction.
The valid deduction is: Not Waiver OR Not Stipend -> Not Chancellor's Fellowship.
This guarantees that if either necessary condition is missing, the sufficient condition cannot have been met.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming the contrapositive of a compound conditional statement using De Morgan's laws.
Soru 9Soru →

Under the revised municipal zoning regulations, a geothermal energy facility will be granted a commercial operating permit only if it incorporates advanced seismic monitoring equipment and operates within a strict noise threshold.

Based on these regulations, it is logically valid to conclude that if a geothermal energy facility is not granted a commercial operating permit, it must be the case that it either failed to incorporate advanced seismic monitoring equipment or failed to operate within a strict noise threshold.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The conclusion is logically invalid because it commits the fallacy of Mistaken Negation. The original premise establishes that the equipment and noise threshold are necessary conditions for a permit. The stem incorrectly infers that lacking a permit guarantees a failure to meet these specific conditions, ignoring the fact that the permit could easily be denied for other reasons.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Diagram the formal logic in the original premise.
Permit Granted → (Seismic Equipment AND Noise Threshold)
The phrase 'only if' introduces necessary conditions, which must be placed on the right side of the conditional arrow.
2
Form the valid contrapositive of the original premise.
(No Seismic Equipment OR No Noise Threshold) → No Permit Granted
To form a valid contrapositive, reverse the terms, negate them, and apply De Morgan's laws to change 'AND' to 'OR'.
3
Diagram the logical relationship asserted in the stem's conclusion.
No Permit Granted → (No Seismic Equipment OR No Noise Threshold)
Translating the proposed inference allows for direct comparison with the valid contrapositive.
4
Compare the asserted conclusion to the valid contrapositive.
The asserted conclusion is a Mistaken Negation of the original premise.
The conclusion improperly treats the necessary conditions as if they were sufficient, making the logical inference invalid.

Anahtar Kavram

Distinguishing a valid contrapositive from a Mistaken Negation when evaluating compound conditional statements.
Soru 10Soru →

Match each conditional statement on the left with its logically valid contrapositive on the right.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

The treaty will be signed only if both nations compromise.
Winning the championship requires a strong defense.
Unless the budget is increased, the project will fail.
If the alarm sounds, the building must be evacuated and searched.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct matches accurately pair each conditional statement with its logically valid contrapositive by reversing the sufficient and necessary conditions, and properly negating both terms.
Each correct pairing takes the original conditional relationship, successfully reverses the sufficient and necessary conditions, and negates both. It also properly applies De Morgan's laws by swapping 'and' to 'or' where applicable.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions in each original statement based on logical indicator words (if, only if, requires, unless).
Translated natural language statements into formal conditional logic.
Standardizing the logical structure is a required first step before manipulating the conditions.
2
Apply the rule of contraposition by reversing the order of the conditions and negating both.
Formed the logically equivalent contrapositive for each simple conditional.
The contrapositive is the only formally valid logical deduction that can always be made from a conditional statement.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to compound conditionals during the negation process.
Converted the 'and' conjunction to an 'or' disjunction when negating the required conditions for the alarm.
When negating a conjunction (A and B), the negation distributes to both terms and changes the operator to a disjunction (~A or ~B).

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
Soru 11Soru →

Under the new municipal zoning code, obtaining a commercial building permit requires that the developer submit a comprehensive environmental impact report and secure approval from the local neighborhood council.

Which one of the following statements logically follows from the zoning code requirements?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a developer fails to secure approval from the local neighborhood council, they will not obtain a commercial building permit, even if they have submitted a comprehensive environmental impact report.

Cevap

The correct answer states that failing to secure approval from the local neighborhood council guarantees the developer will not obtain a commercial building permit, even if the other requirement is met.
The stimulus establishes a rule where obtaining a permit requires two separate necessary conditions: submitting a report AND getting council approval. According to formal logic, if a sufficient condition requires a compound necessary condition (A -> B and C), the contrapositive dictates that failing either necessary condition guarantees the sufficient condition cannot occur (~B or ~C -> ~A). Therefore, a developer who fails to get council approval will definitively not get a permit, regardless of whether they submitted the report.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conditional relationship in the stimulus.
Obtaining a permit (Sufficient) -> Submit environmental report AND secure council approval (Necessary).
The phrase 'requires that' introduces necessary conditions for the event that precedes it.
2
Form the contrapositive using De Morgan's laws.
If a developer does NOT submit the report OR does NOT secure council approval -> they will NOT obtain a permit.
To create a valid contrapositive, negate both sides and reverse their order. When negating an 'AND' statement, it becomes an 'OR' statement.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the deduced contrapositive.
The correct choice matches one half of the 'OR' condition in the contrapositive.
Because failing either one of the necessary conditions is sufficient to prevent obtaining the permit, lacking council approval guarantees denial of the permit.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming contrapositives from compound conditional statements (De Morgan's Laws).
Soru 12Soru →

The logically valid contrapositive of the statement 'A clinical trial is deemed ethically sound only if it obtains informed consent from all participants and minimizes potential risks' is 'If a clinical trial fails to obtain informed consent from all participants or fails to minimize potential risks, then it is not deemed ethically sound.'

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The original statement translates to 'If a trial is ethically sound, then it has informed consent AND minimized risks.' Forming the contrapositive requires reversing the conditions and negating them. According to De Morgan's laws, negating an 'AND' statement turns it into an 'OR' statement. Therefore, 'If it does not have informed consent OR does not minimize risks, then it is not ethically sound' is the exact logically valid contrapositive.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions in the original statement.
Sufficient: A clinical trial is deemed ethically sound. Necessary: It obtains informed consent from all participants AND minimizes potential risks.
The phrase 'only if' introduces necessary conditions, while the subject of the sentence acts as the sufficient condition.
2
Formulate the logical relationship of the original statement.
Ethically sound -> (Informed consent AND Minimizes risks)
To apply formal logic rules accurately, we must translate the English text into conditional notation.
3
Apply the rule of contraposition and De Morgan's laws.
NOT (Informed consent AND Minimizes risks) -> NOT Ethically sound. This simplifies to: (NOT Informed consent OR NOT Minimizes risks) -> NOT Ethically sound.
The contrapositive requires negating and reversing both sides. Negating an 'AND' statement requires changing it to an 'OR' statement.
4
Compare the resulting logical formulation to the proposed contrapositive in the stem.
The proposed contrapositive matches the derived logical formulation perfectly.
To determine if the statement is true, the proposed text must reflect the exact logical equivalent.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives with Compound Conditionals
Soru 13Soru →

According to the newly adopted protocols by the Ministry of Health, a pharmaceutical company is permitted to bypass the standard three-phase clinical trial only if the medication in question targets a designated rare disease or has already received full regulatory approval in a recognized partner nation.

Which one of the following logically follows from the Ministry of Health's protocols?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a medication neither targets a designated rare disease nor has received full regulatory approval in a recognized partner nation, then the pharmaceutical company is not permitted to bypass the standard three-phase clinical trial.

Cevap

If a medication neither targets a designated rare disease nor has received full regulatory approval in a recognized partner nation, then the pharmaceutical company is not permitted to bypass the standard three-phase clinical trial.
This option accurately presents the logically valid contrapositive of the stimulus. The original statement is structured as: Bypass -> (Rare Disease OR Partner Approval). The contrapositive requires negating both sides and reversing the logical arrow. Crucially, by De Morgan's laws, negating a disjunction (Rare Disease OR Partner Approval) creates a conjunction (NOT Rare Disease AND NOT Partner Approval). Therefore, if a medication lacks both required criteria, the company is absolutely not permitted to bypass the clinical trials.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions in the stimulus.
Sufficient condition: permitted to bypass trials. Necessary condition: targets a rare disease OR has partner approval.
The phrase 'only if' introduces a necessary condition.
2
Formalize the conditional statement.
Bypass -> (Rare Disease OR Partner Approval)
This establishes the core logical relationship provided by the Ministry of Health's protocol.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to form the valid contrapositive.
Negating an 'OR' statement creates an 'AND' statement. Therefore: (NOT Rare Disease AND NOT Partner Approval) -> NOT Bypass.
A valid contrapositive requires reversing the conditions and negating both sides. For compound conditionals, De Morgan's laws mandate flipping disjunctions to conjunctions.
4
Evaluate the answer choices to find the match.
The correct option perfectly reflects the deduction: neither targeting a rare disease nor having approval (NOT Rare Disease AND NOT Partner Approval) means the company is not permitted to bypass the trial.
The correct answer to a 'must be true' inference question testing conditionals is almost always the exact contrapositive.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming contrapositives of compound conditional statements using De Morgan's laws.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 14Soru →

Match each conditional cybersecurity rule from the corporate protocol manual on the left with its logically equivalent contrapositive on the right.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

A contractor receives elevated system privileges only if they pass a comprehensive security audit.
Deploying the emergency containment protocol requires both authorization from the director and at least two active secondary servers.
The internal communications network will remain isolated unless the external threat neutralizes.
An employee's device is flagged for immediate review if it connects to an unsecured network or downloads restricted software.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct matches pair each original statement with its exact logical contrapositive by reversing the sufficient and necessary conditions, negating both, and properly applying De Morgan's laws to compound rules.
Each correct right-side item represents a logically valid deduction from the corresponding left-side item. The contrapositive is formed by universally reversing the direction of the conditional relationship and negating both sides. When terms include 'AND' or 'OR', De Morgan's laws correctly transform the operators during the negation process.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the 'only if' statement regarding system privileges.
Matches with 'If a contractor does not pass a comprehensive security audit...'
'Only if' indicates a necessary condition (Privileges -> Audit). Reversing and negating yields: If not Audit, then not Privileges.
2
Analyze the compound 'requires both' statement regarding the containment protocol.
Matches with 'If director authorization is missing or there are fewer than two active secondary servers...'
The sufficient condition is deploying the protocol. The necessary condition is a conjunction (Director AND Servers). The contrapositive negates the conjunction into a disjunction (Not Director OR Not Servers).
3
Analyze the 'unless' statement regarding the communications network.
Matches with 'If the internal communications network does not remain isolated...'
'Unless' is translated as 'if not' (If not Neutralized -> Isolated). The contrapositive flips and negates this: If not Isolated -> Neutralized.
4
Analyze the compound 'if' statement regarding employee devices.
Matches with 'If an employee's device is not flagged for immediate review...'
The 'if' introduces a sufficient condition that is a disjunction (Unsecured OR Restricted -> Flagged). The contrapositive negates the disjunction into a conjunction: Not Flagged -> (Not Unsecured AND Not Restricted).

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives and Applying De Morgan's Laws
Soru 15Soru →

According to the revised federal tax code, for a corporation to qualify for the green energy exemption, it is necessary that the corporation either sources at least half of its electricity from renewable methods or invests heavily in carbon sequestration research. The exemption was created to incentivize sustainable business practices across all industrial sectors without crippling economic growth.

Which one of the following statements can be logically inferred from the information provided above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: If a corporation neither sources at least half of its electricity from renewable methods nor invests heavily in carbon sequestration research, it does not qualify for the green energy exemption.

Cevap

The statement asserting that a corporation failing both the renewable sourcing requirement and the carbon sequestration investment requirement does not qualify for the green energy exemption.
The correct answer flawlessly applies the logical rule of contraposition and De Morgan's laws. The stimulus establishes that to qualify for the exemption, a corporation must meet at least one of two requirements (renewables OR sequestration). Therefore, if a corporation fails to meet both of these requirements, it has failed the necessary condition and logically cannot qualify for the exemption.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conditional relationship in the stimulus.
Qualify for Exemption -> Source Renewables OR Invest in Sequestration.
The phrase 'it is necessary that... either... or' establishes the necessary conditions for qualifying.
2
Apply the rule for forming a contrapositive (negate and reverse) along with De Morgan's laws for compound conditionals.
NOT Source Renewables AND NOT Invest in Sequestration -> NOT Qualify for Exemption.
When a necessary condition contains an 'OR', negating it requires changing the 'OR' to an 'AND'. Failing both conditions guarantees the sufficient condition cannot occur.
3
Evaluate the options to find the one that matches this valid contrapositive.
The correct answer accurately states that failing both conditions ('neither... nor...') leads to not qualifying.
Only this option perfectly mirrors the logical deduction formed in step 2.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives with De Morgan's Laws
Soru 16Soru →

Consider the following principle from a city's architectural preservation guidelines:

A building is eligible for the heritage registry only if it retains its original facade and has not undergone major structural modifications.

The logically valid contrapositive of this principle is: If a building is not eligible for the heritage registry, then it must either not retain its original facade or have undergone major structural modifications.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The proposed statement is logically false because it is a Mistaken Negation of the original principle. The original conditional statement is 'If eligible, then retains facade AND no major modifications.' A valid contrapositive must both negate AND reverse the conditions, resulting in 'If does not retain facade OR has major modifications, then not eligible.' The statement provided correctly negates the terms using De Morgan's laws but fails to reverse them, incorrectly inferring the absence of the necessary conditions from the absence of the sufficient condition.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions in the original principle.
Sufficient: A building is eligible for the heritage registry. Necessary: It retains its original facade AND has not undergone major structural modifications.
The phrase 'only if' introduces the necessary condition for a conditional statement.
2
Formalize the conditional statement.
Eligible → (Retains Facade AND NOT Major Modifications).
Translating the text into formal logic helps prevent structural errors when evaluating inferences.
3
Determine the logically valid contrapositive of the formal statement.
(NOT Retains Facade OR Major Modifications) → NOT Eligible.
A valid contrapositive is formed by reversing the sufficient and necessary conditions and negating both. According to De Morgan's laws, negating an 'AND' statement creates an 'OR' statement.
4
Evaluate the proposed statement against the valid contrapositive.
The proposed statement is: NOT Eligible → (NOT Retains Facade OR Major Modifications). This is a Mistaken Negation.
The statement negates the conditions but fails to reverse them, making it logically invalid.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming contrapositives using De Morgan's laws
Soru 17Soru →

Under the revised maritime salvage code, a claimant is entitled to a full recovery fee only if the recovered vessel was actively broadcasting a distress signal or the claimant can prove the vessel was abandoned for at least thirty days.

Consider this deduction: 'If a claimant cannot prove the vessel was abandoned for at least thirty days, or if the vessel was not actively broadcasting a distress signal, then the claimant is not entitled to a full recovery fee.'

Is this deduction logically valid based exclusively on the code provided?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False. The deduction is logically invalid due to an incorrect application of De Morgan's laws when forming the contrapositive.
The deduction is logically invalid. The original rule requires at least one of two conditions (broadcasting OR abandoned) to be true for the fee entitlement to be possible. To properly deduce that a claimant is NOT entitled to the fee via a contrapositive, BOTH conditions must be negated and joined by 'AND' (not broadcasting AND not abandoned). The provided statement incorrectly uses 'or', meaning a claimant who only failed one condition would erroneously lose the fee, contradicting the original rule.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conditional indicator and translate the original rule into formal logic.
Entitled to Fee -> (Broadcasting Signal OR Proved Abandoned).
The phrase 'only if' introduces a necessary condition. The condition itself is a compound statement joined by the word 'or'.
2
Formulate the correct contrapositive by negating both sides and reversing their order.
NOT (Broadcasting Signal OR Proved Abandoned) -> NOT Entitled to Fee.
A logically valid deduction via contrapositive requires negating the necessary condition to serve as the new sufficient condition.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to simplify the negated necessary condition.
(NOT Broadcasting Signal AND NOT Proved Abandoned) -> NOT Entitled to Fee.
The negation of an 'OR' statement is an 'AND' statement. A claimant must fail BOTH conditions to guarantee the loss of the fee.
4
Compare the logically valid contrapositive to the deduction provided in the stem.
The provided deduction uses 'or' (fails condition A OR fails condition B) instead of 'and'.
Because the deduction concludes the fee is denied based on failing only one condition rather than failing both, it is an invalid deduction.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives with De Morgan's Laws
Soru 18Soru →

Consider the following legal principle: To secure a federal appellate reversal of a lower court's procedural ruling, an appellant must demonstrate both that the presiding judge exhibited clear bias and that the original defense counsel failed to raise a timely objection, unless new exculpatory evidence has emerged since the trial concluded.

Based exclusively on this principle, is the following deduction logically valid?
If no new exculpatory evidence has emerged since the trial concluded, and the federal appellate court refuses to reverse the lower court's procedural ruling, then the appellant must have failed to demonstrate either that the judge exhibited clear bias or that the original defense counsel failed to raise a timely objection.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

The deduction is logically invalid (False).
The correct answer is False because the proposed deduction commits the formal fallacy of Mistaken Negation (denying the antecedent). The original principle states that securing a reversal is a sufficient condition to know that either new evidence emerged, or both bias and a failure to object were demonstrated. Formally, this is: Reversal → ((Bias AND No Objection) OR Evidence). The proposed deduction argues that if there is no evidence and no reversal, then the appellant must have failed to prove bias or failed to prove a lack of objection. Formally: (No Evidence AND No Reversal) → (No Bias OR Objection Raised). This reasoning invalidly attempts to infer the absence of the necessary conditions from the absence of the sufficient condition. It is entirely possible that the appellant demonstrated all the required elements, but the appellate court refused the reversal for a completely different, unstated reason.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Translate the stimulus into formal conditional logic.
Let R = Reversal secured. Let B = Bias demonstrated. Let O = Objection failure demonstrated. Let E = New exculpatory evidence. The rule is: R → ((B AND O) OR E).
Deconstructing the text into formal logic prevents misinterpretation of complex compound conditions and 'unless' statements.
2
Translate the proposed deduction into formal conditional logic.
The deduction proposes: (NOT E AND NOT R) → (NOT B OR NOT O).
This establishes the exact logical structure of the claim that must be evaluated for validity.
3
Determine the valid contrapositive of the original principle.
The valid contrapositive is: NOT ((B AND O) OR E) → NOT R. Applying De Morgan's laws, this becomes: ((NOT B OR NOT O) AND NOT E) → NOT R.
Comparing the proposed deduction against the valid contrapositive reveals structural differences and logical fallacies.
4
Compare the proposed deduction to the valid contrapositive to identify logical flaws.
The proposed deduction attempts to infer the negation of the necessary conditions (NOT B OR NOT O) from the negation of the sufficient condition (NOT R). This is a Mistaken Negation.
Even if the court refuses to grant a reversal (NOT R), the appellant might have successfully demonstrated all the necessary conditions. The conditions are required for a reversal, but they do not guarantee one.

Anahtar Kavram

Distinguishing between a valid contrapositive applying De Morgan's laws and a Mistaken Negation within compound conditional statements.
Soru 19Soru →

Match each access policy for the National Historical Archive on the left with its logically valid contrapositive on the right.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

A researcher cannot access the restricted vault unless they possess a faculty sponsor and a valid security clearance.
An artifact may be photographed only if it is fully restored or encased in protective glass.
Having a certified archivist present is a necessary requirement to open the sealed manuscripts.
Provided that a document is both fragile and heavily redacted, it will not be exhibited to the public.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct pairings link each conditional statement to its logically equivalent contrapositive, paying close attention to De Morgan's laws for compound conditions.
Each matching pair accurately translates the natural language indicator words ('unless', 'only if', 'necessary', 'provided that') into a formal conditional relationship, then correctly reverses and negates both sides. For policies involving compound conditions, De Morgan's laws are correctly applied to switch 'and' to 'or' and vice versa.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the first policy to identify the sufficient and necessary conditions.
Sufficient: Accessing the vault. Necessary: Possessing a sponsor AND a clearance.
The word 'unless' introduces the necessary condition, while the negated sufficient condition becomes positive.
2
Form the contrapositive of the first policy using De Morgan's laws.
If a researcher lacks a sponsor OR lacks a clearance, they cannot access the vault.
Negating an 'AND' statement turns it into an 'OR' statement, and reversing it yields the valid contrapositive.
3
Identify conditions and form the contrapositive for the second policy.
Original: Photographed -> Restored OR Encased. Contrapositive: Not Restored AND Not Encased (Neither) -> Cannot be Photographed.
'Only if' points to the necessary condition. Negating 'OR' results in 'neither/nor' (AND).
4
Identify conditions and form the contrapositive for the third policy.
Original: Open manuscripts -> Archivist present. Contrapositive: No archivist present -> Cannot open manuscripts.
An explicitly stated 'necessary requirement' becomes the right side of the conditional arrow. Negating both sides and reversing gives the valid deduction.
5
Identify conditions and form the contrapositive for the fourth policy.
Original: Fragile AND Redacted -> Not Exhibited. Contrapositive: Exhibited -> Not Fragile OR Not Redacted.
'Provided that' introduces a sufficient condition. Negating 'not exhibited' yields 'exhibited'. Negating 'fragile AND redacted' yields 'not fragile OR not redacted'.

Anahtar Kavram

Forming logically valid contrapositives, including the application of De Morgan's laws to compound conditional statements.
Soru 20Soru →

Under the newly drafted guidelines for experimental therapies, a novel neuroprotectant drug can be granted expedited regulatory review only if it demonstrates a statistically significant reduction in cellular degradation and does not trigger severe autoimmune responses in the test cohort.

Which one of the following logically follows from the guidelines described above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Any novel neuroprotectant drug that either fails to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in cellular degradation or triggers severe autoimmune responses in the test cohort will be denied expedited regulatory review.

Cevap

The statement concluding that a drug will be denied expedited regulatory review if it either fails to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in cellular degradation or triggers severe autoimmune responses in the test cohort.
The stimulus establishes a conditional rule where expedited review (the sufficient condition) requires two necessary conditions: demonstrating a significant reduction AND not triggering severe autoimmune responses. The valid contrapositive is formed by reversing the arrow and negating both sides. Applying De Morgan's laws, the negation of an 'AND' statement becomes an 'OR' statement, meaning the failure of EITHER necessary condition guarantees that the sufficient condition (expedited review) cannot occur.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Diagram the conditional premise provided in the stimulus.
Expedited Review → (Significant Reduction AND NOT Autoimmune Responses)
Identifying the sufficient condition (Expedited Review) and the necessary conditions (Significant Reduction, NO Autoimmune Responses) is required for formal logic deductions.
2
Form the contrapositive by reversing the conditional relationship and negating both sides.
NOT (Significant Reduction AND NOT Autoimmune Responses) → NOT Expedited Review
The contrapositive is the only logically valid deduction that can be drawn with certainty from a basic conditional statement.
3
Apply De Morgan's laws to simplify the negated necessary condition.
(NOT Significant Reduction OR Autoimmune Responses) → NOT Expedited Review
When negating a compound 'AND' statement, it becomes an 'OR' statement, and each individual term is negated (negating 'NOT Autoimmune Responses' becomes 'Autoimmune Responses').

Anahtar Kavram

Forming Contrapositives and Applying De Morgan's Laws
Sayfa 1 / 2Sonraki