Modus ponens.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Rules of Inference Rosen 1.5.
Advertisements

Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:
1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.
1 Section 1.5 Rules of Inference. 2 Definitions Theorem: a statement that can be shown to be true Proof: demonstration of truth of theorem –consists of.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Valid AND Invalid Arguments 2.3 Instructor: Hayk Melikya
CS128 – Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science
Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences
TR1413: Discrete Mathematics For Computer Science Lecture 3: Formal approach to propositional logic.
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions and Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
Copyright © Peter Cappello Logical Inferences Goals for propositional logic 1.Introduce notion of a valid argument & rules of inference. 2.Use inference.
Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
1.5 Rules of Inference.
Deduction, Proofs, and Inference Rules. Let’s Review What we Know Take a look at your handout and see if you have any questions You should know how to.
Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.
Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 1.2 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesFormal Logic.
Today’s Lesson is on DEDUCTIVE REASONING.
Ch 1.4: Basic Proof Methods I A theorem is a proposition, often of special interest. A proof is a logically valid deduction of a theorem, using axioms,
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Chapter 2: The Logic of Quantified Statements. Predicate Calculus Instructor: Hayk Melikya 2.3.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
Formal Logic Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 1 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesFormal Logic.
The construction of a formal argument
Syllogisms and Three Types of Hypothetical Syllogisms
Fall 2008/2009 I. Arwa Linjawi & I. Asma’a Ashenkity 11 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Rules of inference.
Symbolic Logic ⊃ ≡ · v ~ ∴. What is a logical argument? Logic is the science of reasoning, proof, thinking, or inference. Logic allows us to analyze a.
Logic: The Language of Philosophy. What is Logic? Logic is the study of argumentation o In Philosophy, there are no right or wrong opinions, but there.
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapter 1 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
Chapter 1 Logic and proofs
THE NATURE OF ARGUMENT. THE MAIN CONCERN OF LOGIC Basically in logic we deal with ARGUMENTS. Mainly we deal with learning of the principles with which.
Formal logic The part of logic that deals with arguments with forms.
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 =
March 23 rd. Four Additional Rules of Inference  Constructive Dilemma (CD): (p  q) (r  s) p v r q v s.
Copyright © Peter Cappello
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic
Logic and Reasoning.
Arguments with Quantified Statements
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 01/30/17
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
Formal Logic CSC 333.
Logical Inferences: A set of premises accompanied by a suggested conclusion regardless of whether or not the conclusion is a logical consequence of the.
Natural Deduction: Using simple valid argument forms –as demonstrated by truth-tables—as rules of inference. A rule of inference is a rule stating that.
Proof Techniques.
Rules of Inference Section 1.6.
Introduction to Symbolic Logic
6.1 Symbols and Translation
Methods for Evaluating Validity
Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference
7.1 Rules of Implication I Natural Deduction is a method for deriving the conclusion of valid arguments expressed in the symbolism of propositional logic.
Logical Inferences: A set of premises accompanied by a suggested conclusion regardless of whether or not the conclusion is a logical consequence of the.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
3.5 Symbolic Arguments.
Hurley … Chapter 6.5 Indirect Truth Tables
CS 270 Math Foundations of CS
CS 220: Discrete Structures and their Applications
Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 1: Logic
Back to “Serious” Topics…
The Method of Deduction
Logical Entailment Computational Logic Lecture 3
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic
CSNB234 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Intermediate Level Conditionals.
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Chapter 8 Natural Deduction
Identifying & Ordering
Rules of inference Section 1.5 Monday, December 02, 2019
Presentation transcript:

Modus ponens

In propositional logic, modus ponendo ponens (Latin for "the way that affirms by affirming"; often abbreviated to MP or modus ponens) or implication elimination is a valid, simple argument form and rule of inference. It can be summarized as "P implies Q; P is asserted to be true, so therefore Q must be true." The history of modus ponens goes back to antiquity.

While modus ponens is one of the most commonly used concepts in logic it must not be mistaken for a logical law; rather, it is one of the accepted mechanisms for the construction of deductive proofs that includes the "rule of definition" and the "rule of substitution". Modus ponens allows one to eliminate a conditional statement from a logical proof or argument (the antecedents) and thereby not carry these antecedents forward in an ever-lengthening string of symbols; for this reason modus ponens is sometimes called the rule of detachment. Enderton, for example, observes that "modus ponens can produce shorter formulas from longer ones", and Russell observes that "the process of the inference cannot be reduced to symbols. Its sole record is the occurrence of ⊦q [the consequent] . . . an inference is the dropping of a true premise; it is the dissolution of an implication".

A justification for the "trust in inference is the belief that if the two former assertions [the antecedents] are not in error, the final assertion [the consequent] is not in error". In other words: if one statement or proposition implies a second one, and the first statement or proposition is true, then the second one is also true. If P implies Q and P is true, then Q is true. An example is: If it is raining, I will meet you at the theater. It is raining. Therefore, I will meet you at the theater.