i. If there is a king in the hand then there is an ace, or if there isn’t a king in the hand then there is an ace, but not both.
ii. There is a king in the hand.
Given the above premises, what can you infer?
(In reply to re(3): Answer .... to your questions
by Steve Herman)
I think Ady had in mind an ambiguity, and in fact disagrees with me, at least in part.
I had a different interpretation of to what "but not both" applies: I had thought it applied to not both a king and ace in the second of two or'ed conditions, whereas Math Man probably was correct in his interpretation as applying to the two or'ed statements themselves, making them an exclusive or.
Posted by Charlie
on 2016-11-12 15:07:54