# LMD Async Tutoring **URL:** https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933 **Category:** Tutoring **Created:** [April 23, 2024, 12:05am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933 "2024-04-23T00:05:39Z") **Posts on this page:** 1 **Showing post:** 279
### Author: ![LMD](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/lmd/32/3213_2.png) [@LMD](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/LMD) #### Post date: [June 18, 2024, 4:42am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933/279 "2024-06-18T04:42:08Z")
I’ve had trouble understanding the conditional operation ‘if p then q’ or p ⇒ q. It seems this is common with other beginners. It seems to not map well to spoken language and I’ve seen it recommended that you just think of it as a convention. ![Screenshot 2024-06-18 at 2.40.44 PM](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/uploads/default/original/2X/e/e916c663e3da8f9d230bcff47324ce310902d03b.png) So p⇒q outputs q if p is true. That makes sense. But if p is false it outputs true. I don’t know a way for this to make sense to me. I have read that it’s equivalent to ~p v q, and I can make the truth table for that and see it, but that doesn’t seem to help me. It just seems like a fact about two operations outputting the same thing. It seems like there should be a better way than just accepting it as a convention, and before I do I want to know if there is a better way. Do you have any advice for how to think about it? --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933)._