Non Temporal Relationship in Suff & Necc Conditions P290

[leslie7]

Hi there,

This may have been touched upon already but I did a quick search with the word "temporal relationship" and didn't find anything. I think that possibly understanding this statement may not only help me to better differentiate between Cause and Effect vs Conditionality but also help to tear down a misunderstanding I might have of conditionality that feels to linger when I work with conditionals

On page 290 it states "in suff and necc statements there is no implied temporal relationship: the sufficient condition can happen before, at the same time as or after the necessary condition"

Eg. IF A then B but If B not necessarily A
I understand this (in translation) that When A then B so A has to occur in order for B to occur or it has to be present for B to be present as in it has to occur prior to B?

because when B is present it doesn't nec mean A is present

I think this strikes to the core of my misunderstanding of conditionals. If someone could shed some light on the understanding I have of conditionals at its root, that would be greatly appreciated. (I hope my question makes sense)

In essence, I don't understand how the quote can stand in a conditional relationship. Using the same language from the textbook-
How is it that there is no temporal relationship in sufficient and necessary conditions?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Leslie!

I hope I understand your question. Let me see if I can clarify some things about temporal relationships in conditional reasoning by giving some examples. It's a rainy day where I am so my examples are going to have a theme.

In order for rain to occur, there must be clouds first.
In this example, the necessary condition (clouds) occurs before the sufficient condition (rain). First there are clouds, then it rains. We could still have the necessary condition without the sufficient condition (sometimes there are clouds without rain).

When I stand in the rain, I get wet.
In this example, the necessary condition (getting wet) occurs at the same time as the sufficient condition (standing in the rain). But, again, we could still have the necessary condition without the sufficient condition (I also get wet when I shower, for example).

Whenever I plan an outdoor event, it always rains on that day.
In this example, the necessary condition (raining) occurs after the sufficient condition (planning an outdoor event). And again, we could have the necessary condition without the sufficient condition (it can rain on days that I haven't planned outdoor events for).

So, as these examples illustrate, there's no inherent temporal relationship in conditional reasoning. The sufficient condition just indicates that the necessary condition must also occur. But it could indicate that the necessary condition has already occurred, that the necessary condition will occur in the future, or that the necessary condition is occurring at the same time.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[leslie7]

Hi Kelsey,

Thanks so much. I find your answers to my questions very helpful. I appreciate your time and patience with the thoroughness of your responses - I find them very clear.