Question

What is the inverse of the statement below?

"If an animal is a horse, then it wears horseshoes."
o If an animal is not a horse, then it does not wear horseshoes.
o If an animal does not wear horseshoes, then it is not a horse.
o If an animal is not a horse, then it wears horseshoes.
o If an animal wears horseshoes, then it is a horse.

Answer 1

The correct inverse of the statement 'If an animal is a horse, then it wears horseshoes' is 'If an animal does not wear horseshoes, then it is not a horse'.

Step-by-step explanation:

In logic, the inverse of a conditional statement is formed by negating both the hypothesis and the conclusion. The original statement given is: "If an animal is a horse, then it wears horseshoes." The inverse of this statement should negate both parts. That is, instead of stating that being a horse is a sufficient condition for wearing horseshoes, the inverse would affirm that not being a horse is a sufficient condition for not wearing horseshoes.

Considering the options provided, the correct inverse statement is: "If an animal does not wear horseshoes, then it is not a horse." This formulation aligns with the principles of logic, taking the negation of both components of the original conditional statement.