Quote Originally Posted by swiggidy
Quote Originally Posted by vqc
What is the logical reverse of this statement:
Most P are not R

I.E.
If some A are not C
then,
some C are not A
This isn't formulated properly for a logic statement. "Most" is too vague and would never be used. The only terms I have ever seen are "There exists", meaning there is at least one, and "All".

As played...
Ax P(x) -> !R(x)

The "reverse"
!(Ax P(x) -> !R(x))
Ex !(P(x) -> !R(x))
Ex (!!R(x) -> !P(x))
Ex (R(x) -> !P(x))

So, assuming "some" is the opposite (or reverse) of "most", my answer is:
Some R are not P

Note:
Ex => The exists an x (There are some x, in this case)
A => All x (Most x, in this case)
! => not

If the problem was "All P are not R" then the inverse is "There exists an R that is not P"
Damn. You FTRers are too smart. I'ma go to another poker forum, talk to some people about doomswitches and rigged poker and lucky hands and that.