Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The answer to the first question is 2 / 3 , as is shown correctly by the "simple" solutions. But the answer to the second question is now different: the conditional probability the car is behind door 1 or door 2 given the host has opened door 3 (the door on the right) is 1 / 2 .
When referring to hypothetical future circumstance, there may be little difference in meaning between the first and second conditional (factual vs. counterfactual, realis vs. irrealis). The following two sentences have similar meaning, although the second (with the second conditional) implies less likelihood that the condition will be fulfilled:
They are so called because the impact of the sentence’s main clause is conditional on a subordinate clause. A full conditional thus contains two clauses: the subordinate clause, called the antecedent (or protasis or if-clause), which expresses the condition, and the main clause, called the consequent (or apodosis or then-clause) expressing ...
[2] [7] The intuitive answer is 1 / 2 . [2] This answer is intuitive if the question leads the reader to believe that there are two equally likely possibilities for the sex of the second child (i.e., boy and girl), [2] and that the probability of these outcomes is absolute, not conditional. [8]
Any conditional statement consists of at least one sufficient condition and at least one necessary condition. In data analytics , necessity and sufficiency can refer to different causal logics, [ 7 ] where necessary condition analysis and qualitative comparative analysis can be used as analytical techniques for examining necessity and ...
The first premise is a conditional ("if–then") claim, namely that P implies Q. The second premise is an assertion that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim, is the case. From these two premises it can be logically concluded that Q, the consequent of the conditional claim, must be the case as well.
Red herring – introducing a second argument in response to the first argument that is irrelevant and draws attention away from the original topic (e.g.: saying "If you want to complain about the dishes I leave in the sink, what about the dirty clothes you leave in the bathroom?"). [72] In jury trial, it is known as a Chewbacca defense.
A "second conditional" sentence expresses a hypothetical circumstance conditional on some other circumstance, referring to nonpast time. It uses the past tense (with the past subjunctive were optionally replacing was) in the condition clause, and the conditional formed with would in the main clause: If he came late, I would be angry.