Divinely illogical

If P, then Q, unless of course you are Aristotle’s universal affirmative, at which point all of your P’s are also Q’s, unless only some P’s are Q’s, and this mustn’t be confused with an introduction that permits us to infer a biconditionality from a pair of closed subproofs, one of which assumes P and deduces Q, the other of which assumes Q and deduces P.*   Not to be outdone by the truth value of the presupposition of sentence S.  (Where’d that letter come from?) That is, unless you have a Boolean Connective…..

I wish I had at least audited Dr. Rouintree’s logic class.

Okay, let’s bring it down more to my level:

If I go to Walmart for groceries and come home with a puppy from the nice woman in the parking lot, and don’t tell my husband, THEN….

If I get a puppy from the nice woman in the Walmart parking lot, and tell my husband, THEN….but that