Abstract

This research studies the main differences between causal, neutral, and arbitrary content in biconditional interpretations with factual scenarios. Our goal is to demonstrate that people evaluate the semantic content of conditional statements rather than following logical formulations when reasoning with conditional arguments. The phenomenon of Conditional Perfection occurs when people prefer a biconditional interpretation over a conditional one when the scenario warrants it, for this reason we have experimentally manipulated the content and scenarios of the statement to modulate the acceptance of conditional arguments such as modus ponens, modus tollens, affirmation of the consequent, and denial of the antecedent.