Speaking of cats...

Cat shoots owner.

another reason not to keep guns in the house. you never know when they'll mutiny.

Mathy question for the hivemind:

I'm taking this dumb "how logical are you?" quiz, and I think one of the questions is wrong. It reads:

If Jenny hits a home run, her team will win. Given that this is true, what else also must be true?

a. If the team won, Jenny hit a home run.

b. If Jenny didn't hit a home run, the team tied.

c. If the team didn't win, Jenny didn't hit a home run.

d. All of the above.

They apparently want C as the answer. I seem to remember, dimly, that "If not Y, then not X" does not automatically follow from "If X, then Y," but I'm having a hard time thinking of counterexamples.

Anyone?

She is SO CREEPY. And then there is all the sibling sex in her books, and that creepy prologue in Flowers in the Attic, where she talks about how it was based on her real life.

Not to mention that Flowers in the Attic is DEDICATED TO HER MOTHER!

Apparently, my doll is one of the Fraggles: [link]

If Jenny hits a home run, her team will win. Given that this is true, what else also must be true?

c. If the team didn't win, Jenny didn't hit a home run.

That looks right to me, given that the first statement is established as correct. Where it's causing you a problem, I think, is that it's not a very good real world situation, since there are easily imaginable scenarios where the first statement is more of an extreme probability than an absolute. As an overthinker from way back, I feel your pain.

Cat shoots owner.

"I said MORE CATNIP, bitch!" t BLAM

Anyone?

C. looks right to me.

Lyra, I can't get mathy in my explanation, but no, there's nothing wrong with the question.

If Jenny hits a home run, her team will win. Given that this is true, what else also must be true?

a. If the team won, Jenny hit a home run.

Answer (a.) is not necessarily true (it is not a must, if condition A (her hitting the run) is fulfilled), because we don't know that the *only* way they could win is if she hit the home run, just that it is one way. For all we know, she could have struck out, but Janie could have been up next, hit a run, and they could still win.

b. If Jenny didn't hit a home run, the team tied.

We don't know how many outs are left, so we can't say this must be true.

d. All of the above.

Because we have no reason to believe either (a) or (b) must be true we cannot choose (d).

Here's what we know:

If Jenny hits a home run, her team will win. Given that this is true, what else also must be true?

c. If the team didn't win, Jenny didn't hit a home run.

It is set up in the question that if she hits the run, they've won. Since that condition is worded that way, if condition 1 is fulfilled, result 2 will happen (it's a guarantee of sorts), we know that if result 2 does not happen, condition 1 could not have been fulfilled.

I think, is that it's not a very good real world situation, since there are easily imaginable scenarios where the first statement is more of an extreme probability than an absolute.

This is a good way of saying it. Once it is probabilistic it turns into a cogntive error called confusion of inverse probabilities. And in real life it's almost always probabilistic.

I got C. as correct, too.