A Little Deductive Logic

 Beverly Mitchell Oliver
 6 months ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 A Little Deductive Logic In propositional or sentential deductive logic, we begin by specifying that we will use capital letters (like A, B, C, D, and so on) to stand in for sentences, and we assume that sentences are either true or false. That is, we assume that sentences have one or other of two truth values, T or F. We will also need some sentence connectives or logical operators in order to build more complex sentences out of elementary or basic sentences. The sentence connectives correspond roughly to logical expressions found in English (and other languages, of course). Here are a few sentential connectives: Symbol Name Example Rough English Equivalent ~, Negation A It is not the case that A. A: not. & Conjunction A & B A and B. Disjunction A B A or B (or both)., Conditional A B If A, then B., Biconditional A B A if and only if B. A iff B. In the conjunction A & B, we call the two component sentences A, B conjuncts. In the disjunction A B, we call the two component sentences disjuncts. In the (material) conditional A B, A is the antecedent (of the conditional) and B is the consequent (not, please note, the consequence). As logicians, we are not concerned with what sentences are actually true or actually false. It is the job of empirical scientists (among others) to try to determine these facts. As logicians what we do is consider all possibilities of truth or falsity for some given sentence or set of sentences. Take, for example, just one sentence, A. A may be true, or A may be false. (Remember that we are consciously idealizing here. Sentences in ordinary daily usage may be vague, may have more than two truth values or perhaps lack truth value altogether. We are considering only the rather broad class of sentences that have one of two truth values, that are bivalent. There are different logical systems that try to accommodate these
2 other sorts of sentences.) But we can then define negation by means of the following quite natural table: A T F A F T Note that since negation changes the truth value of a sentence from T to F or from F to T, then two negation signs in a row have the effect of leaving the truth value of a sentence unchanged. In classical deductive logic two negation signs in a row can be dropped or omitted, often simplifying complex expressions. (There are nonclassical logics in which this simple rule does not hold.) If we combine two statements, then we have four possible ways that the two component statements may be true or false. We can then define the sentence connectives &,, and by means of the following table of possible truth values of the component sentences (or truth table, for short) and the resulting truth value for the whole sentence: A B A & B A B A B A B T T T T T T T F F T F F F T F T T F F F F F T T The truth table for & is quite natural. The truth table for is also what one would expect. However, there may be a use of or in English in which A or B excludes one of A or B. That is, in this meaning of or, A or B is false if both A and B are true. This kind of or is called the exclusive or. What we have represented in the truth table above is the inclusive or, which is true even if both A and B are true. It turns out that it is convenient to take the inclusive or as basic and define the exclusive or later, should we need it. The truth table for may seem a bit unintuitive, but one might note that it is the same as the truth table for (A & B), which, if you think about it a while (and you should), says: If A, then B. The biconditional has the same truth table as: (A B) & (B A). We can now see that in sentential or propositional logic, if we have a complex sentence made up of sentence letters and sentence connectives, 2
3 then given any assignment of truth values to the sentence letters, we can find the truth value of the whole complex sentence. (Some sentences in natural language do not have this simple truth functional form. Consider, for example, the sentence: Henry believes that A. ) It is worth noting briefly that, if we were developing fully a system of sentential logic, we would introduce parentheses to distinguish sentences that would be ambiguous without them. Consider, as a simple example, the string of symbols ~A B. Is this sentence a conditional with a negated antecedent or the negation of a conditional? (There is a difference! In a world in which both A and B are true, the former is true while the latter is false.) With rules concerning parentheses in place, we might write (~A) B for the former and ~(A B) for the latter. In the first sentence, the negation sign governs only the antecedent (and has, as we say, narrow scope). In the second sentence, the negation sign governs the whole sentence and so has broad scope. Keeping track of scope can be vitally important in evaluating the correctness or cogency of arguments, as we shall see. Below is an example of a truth table for a sentence with three sentence letters. The table provides two extra columns indicating intermediate steps between the assignment of truthvalues to the component letters and the resulting truthvalue of the statement as a whole (for each assignment). A truth table need only contain the assignments of truthvalues and the final result. A B C A B C (A B) ( C) T T T T F F T T F T T T T F T T F F T F F T T T F T T T F F F T F T T T F F T F F T F F F F T T For practice, it will be useful for you to work out truth tables for a few examples, like: (A B) (A & B), (A & B) (A B), ((A B) & A) B, ((A B) & B) A, (A B) ( B A). If you do these examples, you will notice that in some of them (the second, fourth, and fifth) the final row of the truth table will contain all Ts. Sentences that have this property are called tautologies or logical truths, 3
4 while their negations, which have all Fs in the final row of their truth tables, are called contradictions or logical falsehoods. Such sentences are of particular interest to logicians, who, while they are not interested in which sentences are true or false in any given particular world, certainly are interested in which sentences are true (or false) in all (possible) worlds, like the tautologies and contradictions. In addition to helping us find logical truths and falsehoods, truth tables can be of use in evaluating argument forms (and logic surely should have some connection to evaluating arguments). For our purposes, an argument is just a set of statements, some of which we designate as premises and one of which we call the conclusion. An argument is a valid deductive argument if, should its premises all be true, its conclusion is true as well. Consider, for example, the argument form (and I say form, since I will use letters instead of particular sentences): If H, then E. It is not the case that E. Therefore, it is not the case that H. (An argument is sound if, in addition to being valid, its premises are true. Suppose that we can accurately represent this argument in our logical notation in the following way: H E, E, H (where the symbol indicates the conclusion of an argument, just as the abbreviation QED often does.) Then consider the following table: H E H E E H T T T F F T F F T F F T T F T F F T T T The bottom row of this table is the only row (that is, the only assignment of truth values to the constituent sentence letters) in which both premises are true. In this row, the conclusion is true as well. The argument (form) we are considering is therefore deductively valid. This argument form is often called modus tollens or denying the consequent. You should construct tables like the one above to convince yourself of the following claims: 1. The argument form H E, H, E is another valid argument form. It is often called modus ponens or affirming the antecedent. 2. The argument forms H E, E, H (affirming the consequent) and H E, H, E (denying the antecedent) are not valid argument forms. (The third row of the table just above shows that denying the 4
5 antecedent is not a valid argument form. If you have any trouble seeing this, just switch the last two columns.) It is also worthwhile to convince yourself that the following are also a valid argument forms: (A & B) A B, (A & B & C) A B C, etc. When philosophers say that some condition A is a sufficient condition for some other condition B, they usually just mean that A B is true. Similarly, to say that A is a necessary condition for B is to say A B, which can also be written as B A, since this sentence has exactly the same truth table as A B and so, to the eyes of a logician, is indistinguishable from it. If A is both a necessary and sufficient condition for B, we often say A if and only if B, and we sometimes abbreviate this as A iff B. Logicians also write P for it is necessary that P or that P is necessary, and they write P for P is possible. The precise formal definitions of these terms requires more logical machinery than we will employ here, but it the following two assertions should be intuitively plausible: P iff P and P iff P. There are many subtly differing shades of meaning of necessary (must), possible (can), if then or and even and. We shall see that one must exercise great care in coordinating sentences in natural language with sentences in logical formalism, which can be used to disambiguate them. Finally, truth functional logic can also be extended to inferences containing all and some. We will omit details, but it is essential to become familiar with the basic notation. Variables, or placeholders for names, are usually written as x, y, z, Predicates are often indicated by F, G, H, So Fx says that x has property F, where neither the particular thing x nor the particular property F is specified. Then to Fx we can attach an operator that we call the universal quantifier and write (x)fx, [or, in older literature ( x)fx ] which says that everything is F. One might read this sentence to oneself as: For every x, x is F. Similarly (x)(fx Gx) says that for every x if that thing is F, then it s G. That is, all Fs are Gs. Also, we can say that something is an F by attaching an existential quantifier to Fx. That is usually written nowadays as (Ex)Fx. In older literature, you ll often find it written as ( x)fx. One might read this sentence to oneself as: There is an x such that x is F. Alternatively: there is at least one F. It is useful to think through the intended meanings of these symbols and see that the following equivalences must be true: ~(Ex)~Fx iff (x)fx and ~(x)~fx iff (Ex)Fx. 5
6 We can also represent relations amongst two or more things (as opposed to properties that apply to one thing) by using other letters, like R or L. So, for example, we could represent x loves y as Lxy or x gave y to z as Gxyz. This logical notation is quite subtle and flexible, since one can attach (or bind) different variables to different quantifiers (and in different orders). For instance, we could write the (ambiguous) English sentence Everyone loves someone as either (x)(ey)lxy or (Ey)(x)Lxy. Can you see how the logical notation captures the ambiguity (by shifting the order of the quantifiers)? These two sentences are quite distinct. The latter entails the former, but not vice versa. That is, informally, if the latter sentence is true, so must the former sentence be true. If the former is true, however, the latter need not be true. If each person, for instance, loves their own mother, then there need not be one person who is loved by all. As a useful exercise, try to disambiguate these two sentences: (1) Everybody is somebody s fool, and (2) You can fool some of the people all of the time. 6
Propositional Logic. Fall () Propositional Logic Fall / 30
Propositional Logic Fall 2013 () Propositional Logic Fall 2013 1 / 30 1 Introduction Learning Outcomes for this Presentation 2 Definitions Statements Logical connectives Interpretations, contexts,... Logically
More informationLogic and Proofs 1. 1 Overview. 2 Sentential Connectives. John Nachbar Washington University December 26, 2014
John Nachbar Washington University December 26, 2014 Logic and Proofs 1 1 Overview. These notes provide an informal introduction to some basic concepts in logic. For a careful exposition, see, for example,
More informationPropositional Logic Review
Propositional Logic Review UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane The task of describing a logical system comes in three parts: Grammar Describing what counts as a formula Semantics Defining
More informationLogic. Propositional Logic: Syntax
Logic Propositional Logic: Syntax Logic is a tool for formalizing reasoning. There are lots of different logics: probabilistic logic: for reasoning about probability temporal logic: for reasoning about
More informationCHAPTER 1  LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS
CHAPTER 1  LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS 1.1  Logical Form and Logical Equivalence Definition. A statement or proposition is a sentence that is either true or false, but not both. ex. 1 + 2 = 3 IS a statement
More informationTHE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS
CHAPTER 2 THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. SECTION 2.1 Logical Form and Logical Equivalence Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Logical Form
More informationSymbolic Logic 3. For an inference to be deductively valid it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true.
Symbolic Logic 3 Testing deductive validity with truth tables For an inference to be deductively valid it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. So, given that truth tables
More informationFirst order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof
First order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof 1 Outline Introduction Terminology: Propositional functions; arguments; arity; universe of discourse Quantifiers Definition; using, mixing, negating
More informationProofs: A General How To II. Rules of Inference. Rules of Inference Modus Ponens. Rules of Inference Addition. Rules of Inference Conjunction
Introduction I Proofs Computer Science & Engineering 235 Discrete Mathematics Christopher M. Bourke cbourke@cse.unl.edu A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It s a proof. A proof is a proof. And when
More informationNatural deduction for truthfunctional logic
Natural deduction for truthfunctional logic Phil 160  Boston University Why natural deduction? After all, we just found this nice method of truthtables, which can be used to determine the validity or
More informationLECTURE 1. Logic and Proofs
LECTURE 1 Logic and Proofs The primary purpose of this course is to introduce you, most of whom are mathematics majors, to the most fundamental skills of a mathematician; the ability to read, write, and
More information8. Reductio ad absurdum
8. Reductio ad absurdum 8.1 A historical example In his book, The Two New Sciences, Galileo Galilea (15641642) gives several arguments meant to demonstrate that there can be no such thing as actual infinities
More information8. Reductio ad absurdum
8. Reductio ad absurdum 8.1 A historical example In his book, The Two New Sciences, 10 Galileo Galilea (15641642) gives several arguments meant to demonstrate that there can be no such thing as actual
More informationCOMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR
COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR 1 Overview Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies Today Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof
More informationLogical Operators. Conjunction Disjunction Negation Exclusive Or Implication Biconditional
Logical Operators Conjunction Disjunction Negation Exclusive Or Implication Biconditional 1 Statement meaning p q p implies q if p, then q if p, q when p, q whenever p, q q if p q when p q whenever p p
More informationThe Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic
The Importance of Being Formal Martin Henz February 5, 2014 Propositional Logic 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets, and therefore, propositions are limited to stating facts on sets
More informationCS100: DISCRETE STRUCTURES. Lecture 5: Logic (Ch1)
CS100: DISCREE SRUCURES Lecture 5: Logic (Ch1) Lecture Overview 2 Statement Logical Connectives Conjunction Disjunction Propositions Conditional Bioconditional Converse Inverse Contrapositive Laws of
More informationUnit 1. Propositional Logic Reading do all quickchecks Propositional Logic: Ch. 2.intro, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Review 2.9
Unit 1. Propositional Logic Reading do all quickchecks Propositional Logic: Ch. 2.intro, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Review 2.9 Typeset September 23, 2005 1 Statements or propositions Defn: A statement is an assertion
More information3 The language of proof
3 The language of proof After working through this section, you should be able to: (a) understand what is asserted by various types of mathematical statements, in particular implications and equivalences;
More informationChapter 1: The Logic of Compound Statements. January 7, 2008
Chapter 1: The Logic of Compound Statements January 7, 2008 Outline 1 1.1 Logical Form and Logical Equivalence 2 1.2 Conditional Statements 3 1.3 Valid and Invalid Arguments Central notion of deductive
More information6. Conditional derivations
6. Conditional derivations 6.1 An argument from Hobbes In his great work, Leviathan, the philosopher Thomas Hobbes (15881679) gives an important argument for government. Hobbes begins by claiming that
More informationProseminar on Semantic Theory Fall 2013 Ling 720 Propositional Logic: Syntax and Natural Deduction 1
Propositional Logic: Syntax and Natural Deduction 1 The Plot That Will Unfold I want to provide some key historical and intellectual context to the model theoretic approach to natural language semantics,
More information6. Conditional derivations
6. Conditional derivations 6.1 An argument from Hobbes In his great work, Leviathan, the philosopher Thomas Hobbes gives an important argument for government. Hobbes begins by claiming that without a common
More informationOverview. KnowledgeBased Agents. Introduction. COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR
COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies oday Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof theory Natural
More informationGlossary of Logical Terms
Math 304 Spring 2007 Glossary of Logical Terms The following glossary briefly describes some of the major technical logical terms used in this course. The glossary should be read through at the beginning
More informationINTRODUCTION TO LOGIC. Propositional Logic. Examples of syntactic claims
Introduction INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 2 Syntax and Semantics of Propositional Logic Volker Halbach In what follows I look at some formal languages that are much simpler than English and define validity of
More informationMathematical Logic Part One
Mathematical Logic Part One Question: How do we formalize the defnitions and reasoning we use in our proofs? Where We're Going Propositional Logic (Today) Basic logical connectives. Truth tables. Logical
More informationPropositional Logic Not Enough
Section 1.4 Propositional Logic Not Enough If we have: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Does it follow that Socrates is mortal? Can t be represented in propositional logic. Need a language that talks
More information1. Propositions: Contrapositives and Converses
Preliminaries 1 1. Propositions: Contrapositives and Converses Given two propositions P and Q, the statement If P, then Q is interpreted as the statement that if the proposition P is true, then the statement
More informationLogic for Computer Science Handout Week 8 DERIVED RULE MODUS TOLLENS DERIVED RULE RAA DERIVED RULE TND
Logic for Computer Science Handout Week 8 DERIVED RULE MODUS TOLLENS We have last week completed the introduction of a calculus, which is sound and complete. That is, we can syntactically establish the
More informationNotes on Inference and Deduction
Notes on Inference and Deduction Consider the following argument 1 Assumptions: If the races are fixed or the gambling houses are crooked, then the tourist trade will decline. If the tourist trade declines
More informationClassical Propositional Logic
The Language of A Henkinstyle Proof for Natural Deduction January 16, 2013 The Language of A Henkinstyle Proof for Natural Deduction Logic Logic is the science of inference. Given a body of information,
More informationVALIDITY IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC
ITY IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC 1. Tautologies, Contradictions, And Contingent Formulas...66 2. Implication And Equivalence...68 3. Validity In Sentential Logic...70 4. Testing Arguments In Sentential Logic...71
More informationCHAPTER 11. Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic
CHAPTER 11 Introduction to Intuitionistic Logic Intuitionistic logic has developed as a result of certain philosophical views on the foundation of mathematics, known as intuitionism. Intuitionism was originated
More informationFormal Logic: Quantifiers, Predicates, and Validity. CS 130 Discrete Structures
Formal Logic: Quantifiers, Predicates, and Validity CS 130 Discrete Structures Variables and Statements Variables: A variable is a symbol that stands for an individual in a collection or set. For example,
More informationPropositional Equivalence
Propositional Equivalence Tautologies and contradictions A compound proposition that is always true, regardless of the truth values of the individual propositions involved, is called a tautology. Example:
More informationKB Agents and Propositional Logic
Plan KnowledgeBased Agents Logics Propositional Logic KB Agents and Propositional Logic Announcements Assignment2 mailed out last week. Questions? KnowledgeBased Agents So far, what we ve done is look
More informationMath 13, Spring 2013, Lecture B: Midterm
Math 13, Spring 2013, Lecture B: Midterm Name Signature UCI ID # Email address Each numbered problem is worth 12 points, for a total of 84 points. Present your work, especially proofs, as clearly as possible.
More informationMA103 STATEMENTS, PROOF, LOGIC
MA103 STATEMENTS, PROOF, LOGIC Abstract Mathematics is about making precise mathematical statements and establishing, by proof or disproof, whether these statements are true or false. We start by looking
More informationVALIDITY IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC
ITY IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC 1. Tautologies, Contradictions, and Contingent Formulas...62 2. Implication And Equivalence...64 3. Validity in Sentential Logic...66 4. Testing Arguments in Sentential Logic...67
More informationMaterial Implication and Entailment
510 Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic Volume 29, Number 4, Fall 1988 Material Implication and Entailment CLARO R. CENIZA* The paradoxes of material implication have been called "paradoxes" of a sort because
More informationPropositional Logic. CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems. Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor. August 26, Generated on Tuesday 31 August, 2010, 16:54
Propositional Logic CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor August 26, 2010 Generated on Tuesday 31 August, 2010, 16:54 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets,
More informationDefinition 2. Conjunction of p and q
Proposition Propositional Logic CPSC 2070 Discrete Structures Rosen (6 th Ed.) 1.1, 1.2 A proposition is a statement that is either true or false, but not both. Clemson will defeat Georgia in football
More informationThe λcalculus and Curry s Paradox Drew McDermott , revised
The λcalculus and Curry s Paradox Drew McDermott drew.mcdermott@yale.edu 20150923, revised 20151024 The λcalculus was invented by Alonzo Church, building on earlier work by Gottlob Frege and Moses
More informationLogic as a Tool Chapter 1: Understanding Propositional Logic 1.1 Propositions and logical connectives. Truth tables and tautologies
Logic as a Tool Chapter 1: Understanding Propositional Logic 1.1 Propositions and logical connectives. Truth tables and tautologies Valentin Stockholm University September 2016 Propositions Proposition:
More informationUnit I LOGIC AND PROOFS. B. Thilaka Applied Mathematics
Unit I LOGIC AND PROOFS B. Thilaka Applied Mathematics UNIT I LOGIC AND PROOFS Propositional Logic Propositional equivalences Predicates and Quantifiers Nested Quantifiers Rules of inference Introduction
More informationMathematical Preliminaries. Sipser pages 128
Mathematical Preliminaries Sipser pages 128 Mathematical Preliminaries This course is about the fundamental capabilities and limitations of computers. It has 3 parts 1. Automata Models of computation
More informationProseminar on Semantic Theory Fall 2013 Ling 720 First Order (Predicate) Logic: Syntax and Natural Deduction 1
First Order (Predicate) Logic: Syntax and Natural Deduction 1 A Reminder of Our Plot I wish to provide some historical and intellectual context to the formal tools that logicians developed to study the
More informationChapter 2. Mathematical Reasoning. 2.1 Mathematical Models
Contents Mathematical Reasoning 3.1 Mathematical Models........................... 3. Mathematical Proof............................ 4..1 Structure of Proofs........................ 4.. Direct Method..........................
More informationFirst Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics
CS1081 First Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics COMP30412 Sean Bechhofer sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk Problems Propositional logic isn t very expressive As an example, consider p = Scotland won on Saturday
More informationNotes on Quantum Logic
Notes on Quantum Logic Version 1.0 David B. Malament Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science University of California, Irvine dmalamen@uci.edu Contents 1 Formal (sentential) quantum logic 2 2 The
More information2/13/2012. Logic: Truth Tables. CS160 Rosen Chapter 1. Logic?
Logic: Truth Tables CS160 Rosen Chapter 1 Logic? 1 What is logic? Logic is a truthpreserving system of inference Truthpreserving: If the initial statements are true, the inferred statements will be true
More informationWUCT121. Discrete Mathematics. Logic. Tutorial Exercises
WUCT11 Discrete Mathematics Logic Tutorial Exercises 1 Logic Predicate Logic 3 Proofs 4 Set Theory 5 Relations and Functions WUCT11 Logic Tutorial Exercises 1 Section 1: Logic Question1 For each of the
More informationECOM Discrete Mathematics
ECOM 2311 Discrete Mathematics Chapter # 1 : The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Fall, 2013/2014 ECOM 2311 Discrete Mathematics  Ch.1 Dr. Musbah Shaat 1 / 85 Outline 1 Propositional Logic 2 Propositional
More informationLogic and Set Notation
Logic and Set Notation Logic Notation p, q, r: statements,,,, : logical operators p: not p p q: p and q p q: p or q p q: p implies q p q:p if and only if q We can build compound sentences using the above
More informationCITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs
CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs Unit coordinator: Rachel CardellOliver August 13, 2017 Highlights 1 Arguments vs Proofs. 2 Proof strategies 3 Famous proofs Reading Chapter 1: What is a proof? Mathematics
More informationLogical forms and substitution instances. Philosophy and Logic Unit 2, Section 2.1
Logical forms and substitution instances Philosophy and Logic Unit 2, Section 2.1 Avoiding impossibility A valid deductive argument is an argument with a valid logical form. An argument has a valid logical
More informationMathematical Logic Part One
Mathematical Logic Part One An Important Question How do we formalize the logic we've been using in our proofs? Where We're Going Propositional Logic (oday) Basic logical connectives. ruth tables. Logical
More informationINTRODUCTION TO PREDICATE LOGIC HUTH AND RYAN 2.1, 2.2, 2.4
INTRODUCTION TO PREDICATE LOGIC HUTH AND RYAN 2.1, 2.2, 2.4 Neil D. Jones DIKU 2005 Some slides today new, some based on logic 2004 (Nils Andersen), some based on kernebegreber (NJ 2005) PREDICATE LOGIC:
More informationPropositional Logic, Predicates, and Equivalence
Chapter 1 Propositional Logic, Predicates, and Equivalence A statement or a proposition is a sentence that is true (T) or false (F) but not both. The symbol denotes not, denotes and, and denotes or. If
More informationSection 1.3: Valid and Invalid Arguments
Section 1.3: Valid and Invalid Arguments Now we have developed the basic language of logic, we shall start to consider how logic can be used to determine whether or not a given argument is valid. In order
More informationTHE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS. Predicates and Quantified Statements I. Predicates and Quantified Statements I CHAPTER 3 SECTION 3.
CHAPTER 3 THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS SECTION 3.1 Predicates and Quantified Statements I Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Predicates
More informationCollins' notes on Lemmon's Logic
Collins' notes on Lemmon's Logic (i) Rule of ssumption () Insert any formula at any stage into a proof. The assumed formula rests upon the assumption of itself. (ii) Double Negation (DN) a. b. ( Two negations
More informationSection 1.2 Propositional Equivalences. A tautology is a proposition which is always true. A contradiction is a proposition which is always false.
Section 1.2 Propositional Equivalences A tautology is a proposition which is always true. Classic Example: P P A contradiction is a proposition which is always false. Classic Example: P P A contingency
More informationMATH10040: Chapter 0 Mathematics, Logic and Reasoning
MATH10040: Chapter 0 Mathematics, Logic and Reasoning 1. What is Mathematics? There is no definitive answer to this question. 1 Indeed, the answer given by a 21stcentury mathematician would differ greatly
More informationMathematical Logic Part One
Mathematical Logic Part One Announcements Problem Session tonight from 7:00 7:50 in 380380X. Optional, but highly recommended! Problem Set 3 Checkpoint due right now. 2 Handouts Problem Set 3 Checkpoint
More informationSection 3.1: Direct Proof and Counterexample 1
Section 3.1: Direct Proof and Counterexample 1 In this chapter, we introduce the notion of proof in mathematics. A mathematical proof is valid logical argument in mathematics which shows that a given conclusion
More informationDeductive and Inductive Logic
Deductive Logic Overview (1) Distinguishing Deductive and Inductive Logic (2) Validity and Soundness (3) A Few Practice Deductive Arguments (4) Testing for Invalidity (5) Practice Exercises Deductive and
More informationDiscrete Mathematical Structures: Theory and Applications
Chapter 1: Foundations: Sets, Logic, and Algorithms Discrete Mathematical Structures: Theory and Applications Learning Objectives Learn about sets Explore various operations on sets Become familiar with
More informationPropositions. Frequently, we will use the word statement instead of proposition.
Propositional Logic Propositions A proposition is a declaration of fact that is either true or false, but not both. Examples and nonexamples: One plus two equals four (proposition) Mozart is the greatest
More informationAI Programming CS S09 Knowledge Representation
AI Programming CS6622013S09 Knowledge Representation David Galles Department of Computer Science University of San Francisco 090: Overview So far, we ve talked about search, which is a means of considering
More information5. Use a truth table to determine whether the two statements are equivalent. Let t be a tautology and c be a contradiction.
Statements Compounds and Truth Tables. Statements, Negations, Compounds, Conjunctions, Disjunctions, Truth Tables, Logical Equivalence, De Morgan s Law, Tautology, Contradictions, Proofs with Logical Equivalent
More informationNotes for Recitation 1
6.042/18.062J Mathematics for Computer Science September 10, 2010 Tom Leighton and Marten van Dijk Notes for Recitation 1 1 Logic How can one discuss mathematics with logical precision, when the English
More informationThe predicate calculus is complete
The predicate calculus is complete Hans Halvorson The first thing we need to do is to precisify the inference rules UI and EE. To this end, we will use A(c) to denote a sentence containing the name c,
More informationAnnouncements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. Propositional Logic II. Inverse of an Implication. Converse of a Implication
Announcements CS311H: Discrete Mathematics Propositional Logic II Instructor: Işıl Dillig First homework assignment out today! Due in one week, i.e., before lecture next Wed 09/13 Remember: Due before
More informationAnalyzing Arguments with Truth Tables
Analyzing Arguments with Truth Tables MATH 100 Survey of Mathematical Ideas J. Robert Buchanan Department of Mathematics Fall 2014 Introduction Euler diagrams are useful for checking the validity of simple
More informationAnalysis 1. Lecture Notes 2013/2014. The original version of these Notes was written by. Vitali Liskevich
Analysis 1 Lecture Notes 2013/2014 The original version of these Notes was written by Vitali Liskevich followed by minor adjustments by many Successors, and presently taught by Misha Rudnev University
More informationUnary negation: T F F T
Unary negation: ϕ 1 ϕ 1 T F F T Binary (inclusive) or: ϕ 1 ϕ 2 (ϕ 1 ϕ 2 ) T T T T F T F T T F F F Binary (exclusive) or: ϕ 1 ϕ 2 (ϕ 1 ϕ 2 ) T T F T F T F T T F F F Classical (material) conditional: ϕ 1
More informationRussell s logicism. Jeff Speaks. September 26, 2007
Russell s logicism Jeff Speaks September 26, 2007 1 Russell s definition of number............................ 2 2 The idea of reducing one theory to another.................... 4 2.1 Axioms and theories.............................
More informationOverview of Today s Lecture
Branden Fitelson Philosophy 4515 (Advanced Logic) Notes 1 Overview of Today s Lecture Administrative Stuff HW #1 grades and solutions have been posted Please make sure to work through the solutions HW
More informationIntelligent Agents. First Order Logic. Ute Schmid. Cognitive Systems, Applied Computer Science, Bamberg University. last change: 19.
Intelligent Agents First Order Logic Ute Schmid Cognitive Systems, Applied Computer Science, Bamberg University last change: 19. Mai 2015 U. Schmid (CogSys) Intelligent Agents last change: 19. Mai 2015
More informationDERIVATIONS IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC
5 DERIVATIONS IN SENTENTIAL LOGIC 1. Introduction... 142 2. The Basic Idea... 143 3. Argument Forms and Substitution Instances... 145 4. Simple Inference Rules... 147 5. Simple Derivations... 151 6. The
More informationPHIL012. SYMBOLIC LOGIC PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC DERIVATIONS
HIL012 SYMBOLIC LOGIC ROOSITIONL LOGIC DERIVTIONS When we argue, what we want are (i) clearly specifiable rules, (ii) that apply to any particular subject matter, and (iii) that legitimate transitions
More informationChapter 1. Logic and Proof
Chapter 1. Logic and Proof 1.1 Remark: A little over 100 years ago, it was found that some mathematical proofs contained paradoxes, and these paradoxes could be used to prove statements that were known
More informationChapter 3. Propositional Logic
Chapter 3 Propositional Logic 3.1 ARGUMENT FORMS This chapter begins our treatment of formal logic. Formal logic is the study of argument forms, abstract patterns of reasoning shared by many different
More informationTruth Tables for Propositions
Truth Tables for Propositions 1. Truth Tables for 2Letter Compound Statements: We have learned about truth tables for simple statements. For instance, the truth table for A B is the following: Conditional
More information 1.2 Implication P. Danziger. Implication
Implication There is another fundamental type of connectives between statements, that of implication or more properly conditional statements. In English these are statements of the form If p then q or
More informationDiscrete Structures for Computer Science
Discrete Structures for Computer Science William Garrison bill@cs.pitt.edu 6311 Sennott Square Lecture #4: Predicates and Quantifiers Based on materials developed by Dr. Adam Lee Topics n Predicates n
More information1 Tautologies, contradictions and contingencies
DEDUCTION (I) TAUTOLOGIES, CONTRADICTIONS AND CONTINGENCIES & LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE AND LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE October 6, 2003 1 Tautologies, contradictions and contingencies Consider the truth table of the
More informationMAT 243 Test 1 SOLUTIONS, FORM A
t MAT 243 Test 1 SOLUTIONS, FORM A 1. [10 points] Rewrite the statement below in positive form (i.e., so that all negation symbols immediately precede a predicate). ( x IR)( y IR)((T (x, y) Q(x, y)) R(x,
More informationThe proposition p is called the hypothesis or antecedent. The proposition q is called the conclusion or consequence.
The Conditional (IMPLIES) Operator The conditional operation is written p q. The proposition p is called the hypothesis or antecedent. The proposition q is called the conclusion or consequence. The Conditional
More informationSupplementary exercises in propositional logic
Supplementary exercises in propositional logic The purpose of these exercises is to train your ability to manipulate and analyze logical formulas. Familiarize yourself with chapter 7.37.5 in the course
More informationLogical Reasoning. Chapter Statements and Logical Operators
Chapter 2 Logical Reasoning 2.1 Statements and Logical Operators Preview Activity 1 (Compound Statements) Mathematicians often develop ways to construct new mathematical objects from existing mathematical
More informationChapter 14: More on Quantification
Chapter 14: More on Quantification 14.1 Numerical quantification In what we ve seen so far of FOL, our quantifiers are limited to the universal and the existential. This means that we can deal with English
More informationFirst Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics
irst Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics COMP30412 Sean Bechhofer sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk Logic Recap You should already know the basics of irst Order Logic (OL) It s a prerequisite of this course!
More informationEtype interpretation without Etype pronoun: How Peirce s Graphs. capture the uniqueness implication of donkey sentences
Etype interpretation without Etype pronoun: How Peirce s Graphs capture the uniqueness implication of donkey sentences Author: He Chuansheng (PhD student of linguistics) The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
More informationLogic is the anatomy of thought. John Locke
Propositional Logic 1 Logic is the anatomy of thought. John Locke When introduced at the wrong time or place, good logic may be the worst enemy of good teaching. George Polya Propositions A proposition
More informationLP and Relatives. p p
LP and Relatives Graham Priest is certainly the philosopher most widely known as a champion of paraconsistent logic and dialetheism. He has written several books and quite many papers on almost all aspects
More informationPropositional Logic. Logic. Propositional Logic Syntax. Propositional Logic
Propositional Logic Reading: Chapter 7.1, 7.3 7.5 [ased on slides from Jerry Zhu, Louis Oliphant and ndrew Moore] Logic If the rules of the world are presented formally, then a decision maker can use logical
More informationANS: If you are in Kwangju then you are in South Korea but not in Seoul.
Math 15  Spring 2017  Homework 1.1 and 1.2 Solutions 1. (1.1#1) Let the following statements be given. p = There is water in the cylinders. q = The head gasket is blown. r = The car will start. (a) Translate
More information