For Friday, read Chapter 3, section 4. Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4, set I only; Power of Logic web tutor, 7.4, A, B, and C. Graded.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TRUTH TABLES The general truth tables for each of the connectives tell you the value of any possible statement for each of the connectives. Negation.
Advertisements

Chapter 21: Truth Tables.
Logic & Critical Reasoning
With examples from Number Theory
Logic & Critical Reasoning
1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.
Chapter 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof.
For Wednesday, read Chapter 3, section 4. Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4, set I only; Power of Logic web tutor, 7.4, A, B, and C.
IX Conjunctions of Premises & Conclusions Working with more than two premises.
Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.
Uses for Truth Tables Determine the truth conditions for any compound statementDetermine the truth conditions for any compound statement Determine whether.
Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences
Uses for Truth Tables Determine the truth conditions for any compound statementDetermine the truth conditions for any compound statement Determine whether.
Today’s Topics n Review of Grouping and Statement Forms n Truth Functions and Truth Tables n Uses for Truth Tables n Truth Tables and Validity.
For Wednesday, read chapter 2, sections 3 and 4. As nongraded homework, do the problems at the end each section. Also try exercises 7.1, C, D, and E on.
An Introduction to Propositional Logic Translations: Ordinary Language to Propositional Form.
Today’s Topics n Review Logical Implication & Truth Table Tests for Validity n Truth Value Analysis n Short Form Validity Tests n Consistency and validity.
For Wed, read Chapter 3, section 3. Nongraded Homework: Exercises the end of the section. Even better, do Power of Logic, 7.3, A and B. Graded homework.
For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.
1. 2 Day 1Intro Day 2Chapter 1 Day 3Chapter 2 Day 4Chapter 3 Day 5Chapter 4 Day 6Chapter 4 Day 7Chapter 4 Day 8EXAM #1 40% of Exam 1 60% of Exam 1 warm-up.
Reading: Chapter 4, section 4 Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4. Graded Homework #4 is due at the beginning of class on Friday. You.
For Monday, read Chapter 4, Sections 1 and 2. Nongraded homework: Problems on pages Graded HW #4 is due on Friday, Feb. 11, at the beginning of.
The semantics of SL   Defining logical notions (validity, logical equivalence, and so forth) in terms of truth-value assignments   A truth-value assignment:
Logical and Rule-Based Reasoning Part I. Logical Models and Reasoning Big Question: Do people think logically?
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
1.5 Rules of Inference.
2.5 Verifying Arguments Write arguments symbolically. Determine when arguments are valid or invalid. Recognize form of standard arguments. Recognize common.
MATERI II PROPOSISI. 2 Tautology and Contradiction Definition A tautology is a statement form that is always true. A statement whose form is a tautology.
Validity All UH students are communists. All communists like broccoli. All UH students like broccoli.
Truth-Table Definition of Validity An argument is truth-table valid if it is impossible for the premises to all be True and the conclusion False. I.e.,
Review I Rosen , 3.1 Know your definitions!
Chapter Six Sentential Logic Truth Trees. 1. The Sentential Logic Truth Tree Method People who developed the truth tree method: J. Hintikka— “model sets”
The Inverse Error Jeffrey Martinez Math 170 Dr. Lipika Deka 10/15/13.
Chapter Three Truth Tables 1. Computing Truth-Values We can use truth tables to determine the truth-value of any compound sentence containing one of.
Chapter 3: Semantics PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning March 13, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
Study Questions for Quiz 1 1. The Concept of Validity (20 points) a. You will be asked to give the two different definitions of validity given in the lecture.
Thinking Mathematically Arguments and Truth Tables.
No new reading for Wednesday. Keep working on chapter 5, section 3. Exam #3 is next Monday.
Propositional Logic – The Basics (2) Truth-tables for Propositions.
Analyzing Arguments Section 1.5. Valid arguments An argument consists of two parts: the hypotheses (premises) and the conclusion. An argument is valid.
Thinking Mathematically Logic 3.4 Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional.
Symbolic Logic and Rules of Inference. whatislogic.php If Tom is a philosopher, then Tom is poor. Tom is a philosopher.
Chapter Eight Predicate Logic Semantics. 1. Interpretations in Predicate Logic An argument is valid in predicate logic iff there is no valuation on which.
L = # of lines n = # of different simple propositions L = 2 n EXAMPLE: consider the statement, (A ⋅ B) ⊃ C A, B, C are three simple statements 2 3 L =
Truth Tables, Continued 6.3 and 6.4 March 14th. 6.3 Truth tables for propositions Remember: a truth table gives the truth value of a compound proposition.
Jeffrey Martinez Math 170 Dr. Lipika Deka 10/15/13
Truth Tables How to build them
For Friday, read Chapter 4, section 4.
Evaluating truth tables
3 Logic The Study of What’s True or False or Somewhere in Between.
Truth Tables Hurley
Testing for Validity and Invalidity
3.5 Symbolic Arguments.
Propositional Logic.
Midterm Discussion.
The most important idea in logic: Validity of an argument.
Logical Truth To show a statement A is a logic truth (tautology) ...
Deductive Arguments: Checking for Validity
TRUTH TABLES.
Introductory Logic PHI 120
Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional
6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments
Logical and Rule-Based Reasoning Part I
For Wednesday, read Chapter 4, section 3 (pp )
Chapter 2: Geometric Reasoning
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
3.5 Symbolic Arguments.
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
Presentation transcript:

For Friday, read Chapter 3, section 4. Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4, set I only; Power of Logic web tutor, 7.4, A, B, and C. Graded homework #3 is due at the beginning of class on Friday.

A B A → [~ (A & B) → ~ B] T T T   T T  T  T T  T T  T T   T * Answer: Tautology

F G ~ (F → G) & G T T  T  T    T  T     * Answer: Contradiction

Using truth-tables to test for logical equivalence: Make a truth-table that includes both formulae. If their truth-values match on each row, they are logically equivalent; if there is even one line where the truth-values of the two statements (as a whole) don’t match, the statements are not logically equivalent.

D G ~ D v ~ G ~ (D & G) T T     T T   T T T   T T T  T    T T T T  * * * * On each line, the value of the m.o.’s match each other. So, these two statements are logically equivalent.

Exercises on p

Using Truth-tables to test arguments for validity. Place the entire argument on a truth-table: list the premises from left to right, separated by commas; put the conclusion on the far right after a ‘  ’  Fill out the table. If there is at least one row where all premises are true and the conclusion false, then the argument is invalid; if there is no row with all true premises and a false conclusion, the argument is valid.

Z S GZ → (S v G), Z & G  S T T T T T T T T T  T T  T T  T T T T  ***** T        T T T T  T  T  T T  T   T T T      T    * * * * * * Answer: Invalid

Why does it work? Each row on the truth-table represents a relevant possibility (an interpretation), and taken together the rows represent all of the relevant possibilities (all possible interpretations). So, if there is a row on the truth-table with all true premises and a false conclusion, then it is possible to have all true premises and a false conclusion—thus the argument is invalid; and if there is no row with all true premises and a false conclusion, it is impossible to have all true premises and a false conclusion, and by definition, the argument is valid.

P Q SP → Q, S → Q, ~ Q  ~ P & ~ S T T T T T     T T  T T    T T  T   T    T    T T   T  T T T T  T    T  T T  T T T   T T  T T      T T T T T T

Answer? Valid. There is no line showing all true premises and a false conclusion. Thus, it is impossible for the argument to have all true premises and a false conclusion. So, the reasoning can’t go wrong. Whenever the premises are all true, the conclusion is as well. Remember, when an argument is valid, there is no particular line that proves validity.

A B GA → (B & G), ~ B  A  ~ B T T T T  T T    T  T   T      T T T   T  T    T T T   T F F F Answer: Invalid, proven by line seven