I'm struggling to understand the semantics of nested implications in propositional logic.
Take the propositions following:
C: I am eating chocolate
P: I am drinking Pepsi
V: I am eating vegetables
What is the difference between
(a) (C->P)->V and
Here is my understanding so far:
(a) Given that I am drinking Pepsi, as a consequence of eating chocolate, I am eating vegetables.
(b) I am only eating vegetables if I have drunk Pepsi, which in turn was preceded by eating chocolate.
How can I translate this into English, in sensible terms?