CONDITIONALS - DISCRETE MATHEMATICS

Today we go in depth and talk about conditionals, including the converse, inverse, and contrapositive. We also talk about if, only if, if and only if.

*--Playlists--*

*--Recommended Textbooks--*

Hello, welcome to TheTrevTutor. I'm here to help you learn your college courses in an easy, efficient manner. If you like what you see, feel free to subscribe and follow me for updates. If you have any questions, leave them below. I try to answer as many questions as possible. If something isn't quite clear or needs more explanation, I can easily make additional videos to satisfy your need for knowledge and understanding.

[Trevtutor]

It comes with video lectures, text lectures, practice problems, solutions, and a practice final exam!

[artiziff]

I´m starting uni soon and I´m trying to get ahead a bit in my math courses and these are godsent, thank you so much mate

[facebren]

"Mom, I'm not a smartass; I'm just logically sound!"

[hx]

I like the quote "Trick or treat" for imagining a real world equivalent for the definition of the conditional. It doesn't fit perfectly, but it fits close enough that you could see the similarity
C=Trick, Q=Treat

Expressed in mathematical terms, we say
C or Q
which is equivalent to
Q or C

This means that if there is no treat, then there will be trick. In other words,
(not Q) -> C

Now, if you invert or negate the Q, you would have the definition of the conditional
Just a neat little trick to wrap your head around it

[LR-wfoq]

I got confused by reading the comments, however i was understanding everything clearly while i was watching videos and doing exercises at the same time he did

[AWaterKnight]

Mark was still right to hand over the cheatsheet (at some point) in case he wanted to pass because only by doing so did he have a chance to pass.

[bluegiant]

How I saw it with P -> Q in the exam example is that if you have passed then that already implies you have gotten a good exam mark. So T -> T Makes sense.

[thedeathofbirth]

Trev! Can we think of these questions in this way, If the given antecedent is negative, then think of it as a false one, so it will have no effect on the occurrence of the consequent?
Please answer this time, I know you are a prof and very busy but this is really fundamental, I ought to understand it properly. I am jealous of those who have the financial ability to have the privilege of having someone like YOU as a tutor!

[manast]

Thank you a lot Man, it is really effective, and works for me!

[paradox_max]

I think that Dr. Trev was Mark and he still holds grudge towards his professor lmao

[adilformuly]

Perfect Explanation !
Thanks for the help.

[WhiskeredBope]

Mitch Hedberg has some amazing logic-based jokes. "I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too."

[comcfi]

I will demand mum to pay me for doing the dishes now. Thanks mate.

[johnmitchell]

Thanks for the video. It helped me with my discrete math h/w. :)

[zexisun]

Imagine being Mark in the last question.

[wildtiga]

At 5:32, P only if Q is P -> Q. I think you got it wrong here, since in the next video you say the opposite at 1:05

[nikstopics]

Isn't the -> (if then) also called implies?

[mylesjeffers]

Wait, doesn't the contrapositive at the end say, you will NOT fail IF you give me your cheat sheet?
Where have I gone wrong because this implies the Doc did lie?

[redbeardhomes]

If you look at dont give me cheat sheet as p, and you will fail the course as q. then p->q. Do we really need the negation for p, since this logical statement is entirely dependent on q?

[MichaelRobinson-pllx]

It seems to me that the contrapositive is saying that if mark does not fail then he gave Dr. the cheat sheet. Since this is the logical equivalence to the original conditional, should not mark be allowed to pass. By failing mark automatically after looking at the sheet, it seem to me that the Dr. lied hence yes answer. Please explain if I am wrong. Thanks in advance!