College Logic Questions, First Aid!! 5

is cWhoever can see the garment is a competent person or a person who is not stupid", according to the translation of the sentence itself, it should be "Whoever can see the garment is a person who is both competent and not stupid". The two are related to, not to! So wrong!

Choosing C is definitely not A, the original question can be inferred, except? (Except for the wrong one, the one that cannot be inferred).

In answer A: "No incompetent person can see the garment", according to the relationship of the incompetent person, it is a fact that the garment cannot be seen, so it is correct.

If the original title is a true proposition, then its inverse negative proposition is also a true proposition.

The original title was if a, then b

The inverse negative proposition is not a if it is not b

For example: the original proposition: if you eat too much, your stomach will rise.

Reverse negative proposition: If the stomach does not rise, then you have not eaten much.

We know that a or b's non is not equal to not a and not b

The original title was: If the incompetent or the foolish will not see this garment.

The contradiction: If anyone can see the garment, they are all competent and not foolish---a

Obviously, a, b

The incompetent or stupid cannot see, then it can be said that what is seen is competent and not stupid.

a.The incompetent do not conform to the invisible;

bSome worthy people see and conform to it, for some worthy people are not foolish.

cWhoever sees the garment is a man of worthiness or a man who is not foolish, and does not conform to it; If competent" and "not stupid" and not "or".

dWhoever does not see this garment is incompetent or foolish; And it is not said that all competent and not stupid people are visible.

a The question does not say whether a competent or not stupid person can see clothes.

A type of factor analysis.

Serial substitution can be, I don't know if it's right.

Suppose the worker's cold status is C (C0 generally frequents colds, C1 rarely has colds), age A, gender G, physical fitness S, lifestyle habits H, economic status E, whether the worker is regularly exposed to vinegar vapor x (x0 is not often exposed to vinegar vapor, x1 is often exposed to vinegar vapor).

Base period: c0=a0*g0*s0*h0*e0*x0 (1) Substitution 1: a1*g0*s0*h0*e0*x0 (2) Substitution 2:

a1*g1*s0*h0*e0*x0 (3) Alternative 3: a1*g1*s1*h0*e0*x0 (4) Alternative 4: a1*g1*s1*h1*e0*x0 (5) Alternative 5:

a1*g1*s1*h1*e1*x0 (6) Substitution 6: a1*g1*s1*h1*e1*x1 (7) Total impact:

c=c1-c0=（7）-（6）+（6）-（5）+（5）-（4）+（4）-（3）+（3）-（2）+（2）-（1）

Using the causal connection method, let a = frequent contact with vinegar vapor, b = age (b1 = older age, b2 = younger age), c = gender (c1 = male, c2 = female) for the time being, in fact, the principle is the same. A = Rarely catch a cold.

Formula: Occasion Situation Subject (1) a, b1, c1 a(2) a, b2, c2 a(3) a, b1, c2 a(4) a, b2, c1 a Therefore, situation a is the cause of the phenomenon a.

5 teams for a total of 5 matches C 5,2 = 10 matches.

10 games produce at least 2 points per game (regardless of which team is given to), so a total of at least 20 points are generated.

Each additional win yields 1 more point (here the win refers to the field that produces a win or a loss, i.e. a non-draw), because the score is 5 consecutive natural numbers, so the total score is divisible by 5 and B wins, so the total win cannot be 0

And A and E have drawn, so the total draw cannot be 0

And Wins + Draws = 10 and the total score is divisible by 5.

Therefore, excluding the win as 0 or 10, the win is 5

That is, the total score is 25

Fractional order. 1st place 7 = 3 + 3 + 1 + 0 Only this decomposition form B defeats the first place Therefore there must be a defeat So 7 = 3 + 3 + 1 + 0 0 is the second place caused by B 6 = 3 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 + 3 + 0 + 0 third place 5 = 3 + 1 + 1 + 0

4th place 4 = 3 + 1 + 0 + 0 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 5th place 3 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 = 3 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 If the fifth place is B, then the total number of wins is 6 Contradiction So the fifth place is not B So B is one of the second, third and fourth places.

If the second division of the fourth place holds, then the total draw is found in the second place is 6 contradictions, so the fourth place 4=3+1+0+0

The second, third and fourth places all won at least 1 game, and the first place won 2 games, and the full 5 games were completed, so the second place 6=3+1+1+1 and the fifth place 3=1+1+1+0, so the accurate distribution of the game.

Missing conditions next Unable to determine the exact order.

For example, A, D, B, C.

Ding E, A, B, C.

and so on, all in line with the topic.

Among them, A and E can be interchangeable at will.

Therefore, the exact order cannot be determined.

A hypothetical proposition of sufficient conditions, the latter of which is a necessary condition of the antecedent, thus:

If Xiao Li doesn't come, then Xiao Wang comes" is equivalent: only if Xiao Wang comes, Xiao Li will not come.

Question 1: Let "Xiao Li do not come" as p and "Xiao Wang come" as q The original proposition p q

And (p q) (non-q non-p).

The equivalent proposition of the original proposition can be obtained: "If Xiao Wang does not come, then Xiao Li comes".

Question 2: All wrong.

If Xiao Wang doesn't come, Xiao Li will come, which is the opposite of the proposition.

What you said is a hypothetical proposition, and I will give you an equivalent proposition: Xiao Li comes v Xiao Wang comes.

The answer is that C is true, then B can't be tested, and A is admitted, so A is wrong, B is wrong, and C is wrong.

C and B can't be admitted, A can.

A's statement is wrong, B didn't get in;

B is wrong, and A is admitted;

C's statement is wrong, B didn't get in, but A did.