Scribd
Upload
53 views3 pages

Logic Lesson3-5

The document defines tautologies, contradictions, and contingent propositions. It also discusses logical equivalence and how two compounds are logically equivalent if they have the same truth value. It provides examples of testing for tautologies and logical equivalences using truth tables. The document then defines arguments and valid arguments. It states a valid argument is one where the conclusion is true if the premises are true. It discusses using truth tables and formal proof to establish the validity of arguments. Finally, it introduces indirect proof, also called proof by contradiction, which assumes the negation of the conclusion to derive a contradiction.

Uploaded by

Code Bored
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
53 views3 pages

Logic Lesson3-5

The document defines tautologies, contradictions, and contingent propositions. It also discusses logical equivalence and how two compounds are logically equivalent if they have the same truth value. It provides examples of testing for tautologies and logical equivalences using truth tables. The document then defines arguments and valid arguments. It states a valid argument is one where the conclusion is true if the premises are true. It discusses using truth tables and formal proof to establish the validity of arguments. Finally, it introduces indirect proof, also called proof by contradiction, which assumes the negation of the conclusion to derive a contradiction.

Uploaded by

Code Bored
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Lecture 3: Tautologies and Logical Equivalences

Definitions: Tautology, Contradiction, and Contingency

A compound proposition is a:

1. tautology if it is always true for all possible values of its simple components;
Examples:

2. contradiction if it is always false for all possible assignments of truth values to its simple
components;
Examples:

3. contingency/contingent if it is neither a tautology nor a contradiction.

Definitions: Logical Equivalence

Two compound propositions P and Q are logically equivalent, denoted by , if they have the same
truth value.

Guided Exercise:

1. Use truth tables to verify the following equivalences.


a.
b.
c.

2. Show that each compound proposition below is a tautology using truth tables.
a.
b.
c.
Lecture 4: Arguments

Definition: Argument and Valid Argument

1. An argument is an assertion that a given set of propositions , called premises, yields


another proposition Q, called conclusion.

Form:

or

2. An argument is said to be valid if Q is true whenever all the premises


are true. Otherwise, it is an invalid argument or a fallacy.

Theorem: The argument is valid if and only if the proposition


is a tautology.

Ways of Testing/Establishing the Validity of Arguments

1. Truth Table Analysis – show that the conditional proposition is a


tautology using a truth table.
2. Proof of Validity – deduce the conclusion from the premises using the laws of equivalence and
rules of inference.

Formal Proof of Validity – a sequence of propositions, each of which is either a premise of that
argument or follows from the preceding propositions using a Law of Equivalence or a Rule of Inference,
and such that the last proposition in the sequence is the conclusion of the argument whose validity is
being proved.

Guided Exercise: Test the validity of the given


argument.
Proof:
No Propositions Reasons
.
1 Premise
2 Premise
3 2, SP
4 1,3, MP
5 A 3, SP
6 4,5, MP
7 D 6, SP
8 7,AD

Lecture 5: Indirect Proof

Note:

a. aka reductio ad absurdum or proof by contradiction


b. Based on the Law of Excluded Middle which states that a proposition cannot be both true and
false at the same time.
c. As an additional premise, assume the negation of the conclusion and then derive an explicit
contradiction from the augmented set of premises. This will imply that the additional premise is
false.

Guided Exercise: Test the validity for the following argument.

Proof: (by contradiction)

Proposition
No. Reasons
s
1 Premise
2 Premise
3 IP
4 2,3, MT
5 1,4, DS
6 C 5, SP
7 6,3, CJ

You might also like