Das If: Conditional Logic, Part I

Some logical statements merely contain a preposition: it’s hot in herre, Bo can’t rap, Jizzypants is an asshole, et cetera.

Others contain a hypothetical relationship between two conditions.  Those of you who bothered to read the caption have probably figured out that we call the latter set conditional logic.

The two conditions are the sufficient and necessary.  The next time you get that bourbon feeling enough to do something socially maladroit and some nasty Eichmann librarian type tries to scold you by reminding you of “how unnecessary” your actions were, look her right back in the eye with a smirk and respond “…but yet, not insufficient.”  Do it in a Dr. Evil voice for added mirth.  She’ll shut up nine times out of ten, making the response not technically sufficient, but worthwhile all the same.

So what does this shit mean?

The sufficient condition guarantees the necessary condition will occur.  Every single time the sufficient condition happens, the necessary condition will happen as well.  Sufficiency is the ultimate in logical strength: it’s enough by itself to allow you to validly conclude the necessary will come to fruition.

The necessary condition must occur for the sufficient condition to be able to occur.  The necessary enables the sufficient to happen, but doesn’t mean it will.  The absence of the necessary condition bars the sufficient from coming to pass.

If the sufficient condition happens, then the necessary condition will happen.

If the necessary condition happens, the sufficient can happen.

So far so good?

The relationship between sufficient and necessary conditions is best represented by the if-then statement.  If the sufficient occurs, then the necessary does.  In shorthand, we’ll represent that as:

S –> N

Timewarp time.  Let’s say you’re over in London circa 1995 and happen to find the one girl in the club who doesn’t look like calcified dogshit, which is a lot harder in London than I would have thought.  Even better, she’s not married to that fauxhawked asshole David Beckham yet.  You spit your game, and she retorts:

If you wanna be my lover, you gotta get with my friends.

Let’s assume that what she’s actually saying is that all her lovers have gotten with her friends, or that if you’re her lover, then you’ve gotten with her friends.  On a side note, what perverse sentiment is this song conveying?  Is she suggesting her friends test her potential sexual partners before she deigns to accept them?  Oh, he had a decent-sized Member of Parliament but refused to kiss me on the Union Jack.   Then he suggested we take the Bakerloo line on the first date! [1]  Thumbs down, girlfriend.

Anyway, If you’re her lover, then you’ve gotten with her friends.

Sufficient condition: being her lover.
Necessary condition: got with her friends.

L –> GF.

Are you taking the Bakerloo line to Poundtown? [2]  If so, it is absolutely certain that you have gotten with her friends.

If, on the other hand, you’ve gotten with her friends, will you be her lover?  As any young man stuck in the infamous FriendZoneTM knows, going the castrati route through her parade of nitpicker Czechoslovakian judges – who, after all, have a direct investment in her remaining single – is the most surefire way to remain safely outside her panties forever, but you do have the off chance of catching her drunk and lonely one night where she’ll realize how you were always there for her like some knight in shining baggy pants and maybe this could… yes… before she regrets ruining the friendship in the morning and avoids you forever after.  In other words, getting with her friends does not guarantee the sweet horizontal honeypot mambo you were after in the first place.

GF –> [nothing]

But… it does make it possible.

GF –> [HOPE][4]

What about you renegades that think you can pull this bird without getting with her friends first?  Hell no, I’m not jumping through those wizened hoops.  Well, remember how we said getting with her friends was necessary?  You know, like mandatory or required?  Yeah.  You’re going home with your hand.  And since I assume with no basis whatsoever that you’re in your twenties now, your hand was a prepubescent innocent in 1995.  Pedophile. [5]

If you have not gotten with her friends, you will not be her lover.

/GF –> /L

Extra credit: what’s the conditional logic of Beyonce’s dictum?

[1] This is an elaborate anal sex joke.

[2] Sadly, there is no actual London Underground stop at Poundtown.  The closest is probably Leicester Square. [3]

[3] This is another elaborate anal sex joke.

[4] As Edward Abbey reminds us, this springs eternal in the male gonad.

[5] This is NOT an anal sex joke.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s