Q14 - If Slater wins the election,

[xiahong0]

The answer is E, and I can definitely understand why. Their reasoning is the polls are accurate, so slater wins, so mcguiness is appointed, and mcguiness is less qualified than yerxes. BUT I am having difficulty with the conditional logic, specifically the unless part.

"Unless the polls are grossly inaccurate, Slater wins". In the LG guide, the example for unless was P is not included unless Q is. This made sense to me, as it is restated as if P, then Q (because ~Q, ~P). But applied to this case, the unless part trips me up. If i phrase it as "Slater wins unless the polls are inaccurate", then it's "If slater wins, polls are not inaccurate" and the contrapositive is "the polls are inaccurate, slater does not win". This doesn't make any sense for E, because in this formulation, if the Polls are not inaccurate, that does not mean slater wins.

I realize you can also formulate it in this way: If the polls are accurate, Slater wins. The contrapositive is if slater loses, polls are inaccurate. That would give you the answer E. But it doesn't make sense to me intuitively how you can translate "Unless the polls are grossly inaccurate, Slater wins" to that logical formulation.

In addition to this game, could you give me a more in depth guide to how to approach unless statements? In the LG guide, they only give one example of one kind of unless statement.

Much thanks,

Josh.

[bbirdwell]

Hey Josh,

"Unless" statements are tricky at first, but there are some "moves" you can learn to make them easier.

First, though, can you please double-check the problem you are referring to? I can't find it, as Test 36, S1, Q13 is about astronomy, not Slater... S2 Q13 is not it, either.

Thanks!

[xiahong0]

My bad, it is actually PT 36, S1, question 14.

[bbirdwell]

Ah! There it is!

So, unless statements work just like the one you quoted from the book (P and Q).

Easy way to do it: Every time you see "unless," just scratch it out and write "If not."

This is essentially foolproof and you won't have to think about it.

I find it quite un-intuitive to actually think about unless statements. You might consider it this way:

The "default" is for Slater to win. If he does not win, it's an indication that the "unless" thing happened. Not vice versa. ONLY in the event of inaccurate polls does he not win. Rephrased this way, if you know that "only" statements are "necessary" and therefore go on the right, you've got it.

S not win --> inaccurate polls.

Which is to say: if the "unless" does NOT happen, the default remains.

Polls NOT inaccurate --> S wins!

Does that help? Lemme know!

[StanCunningham]

Why isn't B the correct answer?

I understand how (A) doesn't work because Yerxes will not necessarily receive the promotion in lieu of McGuinness. (C) is eliminated for the same reason, and (D) contains assumptions unsupported by the given information.

(B) seems to say much the same thing that (E) does. Is (E) correct because it goes a step further in including Yerxes? Or because the polls being a good indication of how the election will turn out is not the "only" way McGuinness will be elected?

Thanks for your help

[bbirdwell]

Yes, (B) is wrong because this is not the "only" way McGuinness will be appointed.

Think about the argument this way:

Slater wins --> McGuinness appointed
Polls are accurate --> Slater wins

And of course you can put them together:

Polls are accurate --> Slater wins --> McGuinness appointed.

(B) can be symbolized this way:
McGuinness appointed --> polls are good indication (accurate)

This is reversed logic, a very common error on this kind of question.

Does that clear things up?