79 LR One Question 15
- « 79 LR One Question 14
- 3054 of 3815
- 79 LR One Question 16 »
Comments

Hi Dave,
I am struggling to grasp the whole logic of this question and still not sure how this arguer reaches his concl.
He understand S->L as L->S and bc L->HW, L->S cannot be right.
Does he assumes that L->S->HW is impossible?
I mean why the existence of suff condition cannot stand with the existence of necc condition?
We see the chain condi all the time so I am completely confused that he denies the arg based on the existence of necc condition even though he misunderstand the original arg. Does he assumes L->HW is obviously impossible?
Help me out here. Thank you in advance.

Yeah, I see your confusion. The problem is that we consider luck not to require hard work. So, it's totally possible to have the relationship L → S → H (in other words, Luck requires Hard work). The problem comes when you have that relationship while at the same time asserting that Luck doesn't require Hard work.
Is that clearer?