What was difficult for me?
After reading this section, the truth tables were a little difficult for me to understand, especially with the biconditional. (P -> Q)^(Q -> P) After further reading, my understanding is that it is just a switch, i.e. Q -> is the converse of P -> Q. If this is true, then the biconditional is P <-> Q.
Then, also difficult for me was the introduction of logical connectives (~,v,^, ->, <->). I think it was only difficult because it was an introduction to more complicated sentences, these compound statement. I kind of understood these connectives, but then when we used the truth tables to prove if they were true, it was a little difficult because of the complexity. I believe with more practice I will improve with these truth tables. They are new to me.
What did I find interesting?
Life is seldom simple. A lot of examples in school are simple for the purpose of pedagogy. But, when looking at things that we experience in real life, we see complex relationships. Logical connectives and compound statements more accurately reflect scenarios that we see in the world around us. Especially in working with data, which is what I really like to do.
Lately, I have been working on a project for a company that wants us to do market research. The company wants to be able to expand and scale their business but they want to do it with quantifiable data in order to make more accurate decisions. When we first started the project, we assumed that it would be a simple relationship - if we could find one type of data, they would be able to have the necessary information to grow. But, we found that it was more complex with that. After learning about these logical connectives, I think I could use them to make connections between the different stats and data types in order to come to better conclusions. I think I'll give that a try.
After reading this section, the truth tables were a little difficult for me to understand, especially with the biconditional. (P -> Q)^(Q -> P) After further reading, my understanding is that it is just a switch, i.e. Q -> is the converse of P -> Q. If this is true, then the biconditional is P <-> Q.
Then, also difficult for me was the introduction of logical connectives (~,v,^, ->, <->). I think it was only difficult because it was an introduction to more complicated sentences, these compound statement. I kind of understood these connectives, but then when we used the truth tables to prove if they were true, it was a little difficult because of the complexity. I believe with more practice I will improve with these truth tables. They are new to me.
What did I find interesting?
Life is seldom simple. A lot of examples in school are simple for the purpose of pedagogy. But, when looking at things that we experience in real life, we see complex relationships. Logical connectives and compound statements more accurately reflect scenarios that we see in the world around us. Especially in working with data, which is what I really like to do.
Lately, I have been working on a project for a company that wants us to do market research. The company wants to be able to expand and scale their business but they want to do it with quantifiable data in order to make more accurate decisions. When we first started the project, we assumed that it would be a simple relationship - if we could find one type of data, they would be able to have the necessary information to grow. But, we found that it was more complex with that. After learning about these logical connectives, I think I could use them to make connections between the different stats and data types in order to come to better conclusions. I think I'll give that a try.
No comments:
Post a Comment