Scribd
Upload
89 views

2.7 The Logic of Compound Statements Part 7

This uses modus tollens.

Uploaded by

Edrianne Ranara Dela Rama
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
89 views

2.7 The Logic of Compound Statements Part 7

This uses modus tollens.

Uploaded by

Edrianne Ranara Dela Rama
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 50

The Logic of Compound

Statements
Part 7
Valid Argument Forms (Rules of Inference)
Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens
Introduction
•In mathematics and logic an argument is
not a dispute.
•It is a sequence of statements ending in
a conclusion.
Introduction
•In this lesson we want to show how to
determine whether an argument is
valid—that is, whether the conclusion
follows necessarily from the preceding
statements.
Introduction
•We will show that this determination
depends only on the form of an
argument, not on its content.
Introduction
•It was shown before that the logical
form of an argument can be abstracted
from its content.
Example 1
An Argument and its Abstract Form
Argument:
If Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal.
Socrates is a man.
∴ Socrates is mortal.
Abstract Form (logical form):
If p then q
p
∴ q
•When considering the abstract form of an
argument, think of p and q as variables for
which statements may be substituted.
•An argument form is called valid if, and
only if, whenever statements are substituted
that make all the premises true, the
conclusion is also true.
Definition
An argument is a sequence of statements,
and an argument form is a sequence of
statement forms.
Definition
All statements in an argument and all
statement forms in an argument form,
except for the final one, are called premises
(or assumptions or hypotheses).
Definition
The final statement or statement form is
called the conclusion.
The symbol ∴, which is read “therefore,” is
normally placed just before the conclusion.
Definition
To say that an argument form is valid means
that no matter what particular statements
are substituted for the statement variables in
its premises, if the resulting premises are all
true, then the conclusion is also true.
Definition
To say that an argument is valid means that
its form is valid.
•The crucial fact about a valid argument is
that the truth of its conclusion follows
necessarily or inescapably or by logical form
alone from the truth of its premises.
•It is impossible to have a valid argument
with true premises and a false conclusion.
•When an argument is valid and its premises
are true, the truth of the conclusion is said
to be inferred or deduced from the truth of
the premises.
Testing an Argument Form for
Validity
1. Identify the premises and conclusion of
the argument form.
2. Construct a truth table showing the truth
values of all the premises and the
conclusion.
Testing an Argument Form for
Validity
3. A row of the truth table in which all the
premises are true is called a critical row. If there
is a critical row in which the conclusion is false,
then it is possible for an argument of the given
form to have true premises and a false
conclusion, and so the argument form is
invalid. If the conclusion in every critical row is
true, then the argument form is valid.
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Argument Form:
p→ q ∨ ∼r
q→p∧r
∴ p→r
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity

Critical
Rows
(1,4,7,8)
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Recall: Testing an Argument
Form for Validity
3. A row of the truth table in which all the
premises are true is called a critical row. If there
is a critical row in which the conclusion is false,
then it is possible for an argument of the given
form to have true premises and a false
conclusion, and so the argument form is
invalid. If the conclusion in every critical row is
true, then the argument form is valid.
Example 2
Determining Validity or Invalidity
Modus Ponens
•An argument form consisting of two
premises and a conclusion is called a
syllogism.
•The first and second premises are called the
major premise and minor premise,
respectively.
Modus Ponens
•The most famous form of syllogism in logic
is called modus ponens.
•It has the following form:
If p then q
p
∴ q
Modus Ponens
The term modus ponens is Latin meaning
“method of affirming” (the conclusion is an
affirmation).
Modus Ponens
Here is an argument of this form: Recall:
If p then q
p
If the sum of the digits of 371,487 is ∴q

divisible by 3, then 371,487 is divisible by 3.


The sum of the digits of 371,487 is divisible
by 3.
∴ 371,487 is divisible by 3.
Modus Ponens
Construct a truth table for the premises and
conclusion of modus ponens.
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
Modus Ponens
•The first row is the only one in which
both premises are true, and the
conclusion in that row is also true.
Hence the argument form is valid.
Modus Tollens
•Now consider another valid argument form
called modus tollens.
•It has the following form:
If p then q
∼q
∴ ∼p
Modus Tollens
Here is an example of modus tollens: Recall:
If p then q
∼q
∴ ∼p

If Zeus is human, then Zeus is mortal.


Zeus is not mortal.
∴ Zeus is not human.
Modus Tollens
•Modus tollens is Latin meaning “method of
denying” (the conclusion is a denial).
•Construct a truth table for the premises and
conclusion of modus ponens.
Example 3 Recognizing Modus
Ponens and Modus Tollens
Use modus ponens or modus tollens to fill in
the blanks of the following arguments so
that they become valid inferences.
Example 3 Recognizing Modus
Ponens and Modus Tollens
1. If there are more pigeons than there are
pigeonholes, then at least two pigeons roost in
the same hole.
There are more pigeons than there are
pigeonholes.
∴ ________________________________.
Answer: At least two pigeons roost in the same hole.
Example 3 Recognizing Modus
Ponens and Modus Tollens
2. If 870,232 is divisible by 6, then it is divisible
by 3.
870,232 is not divisible by 3.
∴ ________________________________.
Answer: 870,232 is not divisible by 6.

You might also like