Why do you only need a single counterexample to show that a conditional statement is false?

A conditional statement is something like:

If (a condition is true) Then (something is also true.).

What this says is that ALWAYS that the condition is met, then "something" is also true.

For example:

If A > 3, then A > 2.

This is always true, because if A is larger than 3, then A is always also larger than 2.

Now, if we find a single counter-example, then the "always" is false.

This would mean that the condition is not enough, as we found a case that meets the condition, but the second part of the conditional statement is not true.

For example, if i told you that:

If a number is greater than 234, then the number is also greater than 235.

Now, there are a lot of numbers that are larger than 234 and also are larger than 235.

But here we have a counter-example.

235 is larger than 234, so the initial condition is true, but 235 is not larger than 235.

Then we find a number that makes the statement:

"If a number is greater than 234, then the number is also greater than 235."

false.

a box 3 3/4 feet long or 4+ feet.

step-by-step explanation:

the answer to the expression is 83