I was attempting an online logical and mathematical statements self-test from the University of Toronto and came across the following statement in question 1:
The cubic root of a rational number is also a rational number.
We are asked to select an equivalent statement from the provided list. The answer turned out to be:
If $x$ is a rational number, then $\sqrt[3]{x}$ is a rational number.
Why is that?
The given statement seems to be of the form "A is also a B".
A statement fitting that form would be "a feline is also a mammal". But this wouldn't be equivalent to "if $x$ is a mammal, then $x$ is a feline".
I actually translated the given statement as follows, but it wasn't one of the available options:
$\forall x \in \mathbb{Q}, x = \sqrt[3]{y} \Longrightarrow x \in \mathbb{Q}$
Can someone help me identify the flaws in my reasoning, and why the given answer is the correct one?
I think your confusion simply comes from the ambiguity of natural language.
When we say ‘the cubic root of a rational number is also a rational number’, this means ‘for all rational numbers, the cubic root of this number is also a rational number.’ or $\forall x \in \mathbb{Q}, \sqrt[3]{x} \in \mathbb{Q}$. As an implication, we can write this as $x \in \mathbb{Q} \implies \sqrt[3]{x} \in \mathbb{Q}$.
In general, statements of the form ‘$A(B)$ is also a $B$’ can be written as:
$x$ is a $B$ $\implies$ $A(x)$ is a $B$.
(in the above case we have $A$ being the cubic root function and $B$ being ‘a rational number’)
A simpler type of statement is one of the form ‘an $A$ is also a $B$’. This can be written as:
$x$ is a $A$ $\implies$ $x$ is an $B$.
Your statement ‘A feline is also a mammal’ is of this form and so it is clear, as you say, that it is not equivalent to ‘if x is a mammal, then x is feline’.
These two types of statements are fundamentally different. The first type of statement is special because B is referenced on both sides of the implication.