Uses for Truth Tables Determine the truth conditions for any compound statementDetermine the truth conditions for any compound statement Determine whether.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
Advertisements

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.
Truth Functional Logic
Chapter 21: Truth Tables.
Logic & Critical Reasoning
Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:
Higher / Int.2 Philosophy 5. ” All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a philosopher.” Ambrose Bierce “ Those who lack the courage.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Valid AND Invalid Arguments 2.3 Instructor: Hayk Melikya
Use a truth table to determine the validity or invalidity of this argument. First, translate into standard form “Martin is not buying a new car, since.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/26/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.
CS128 – Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science
Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.2 – 1.3 (Modus Tollens) Conditional and Valid & Invalid Arguments.
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.
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.
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.
Proof by Deduction. Deductions and Formal Proofs A deduction is a sequence of logic statements, each of which is known or assumed to be true A formal.
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.
Discussion #9 1/9 Discussion #9 Tautologies and Contradictions.
1.5 Rules of Inference.
Propositions and Truth Tables
Chapter 3 Section 4 – Slide 1 Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. AND.
3.6 Analyzing Arguments with Truth Tables
2.5 Verifying Arguments Write arguments symbolically. Determine when arguments are valid or invalid. Recognize form of standard arguments. Recognize common.
CSCI 115 Chapter 2 Logic. CSCI 115 §2.1 Propositions and Logical Operations.
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.
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.
INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC Jennifer Wang Fall 2009 Midterm Review Quiz Game.
Chapter Four Proofs. 1. Argument Forms An argument form is a group of sentence forms such that all of its substitution instances are arguments.
Chapter 3: Introduction to Logic. Logic Main goal: use logic to analyze arguments (claims) to see if they are valid or invalid. This is useful for math.
Philosophical Method  Logic: A Calculus For Good Reason  Clarification, Not Obfuscation  Distinctions and Disambiguation  Examples and Counterexamples.
Thinking Mathematically
Thinking Mathematically Arguments and Truth Tables.
Venn Diagrams Truth Sets & Valid Arguments Truth Sets & Valid Arguments Truth Tables Implications Truth Tables Implications Truth Tables Converse, Inverse,
6.6 Argument Forms and Fallacies
Chapter 7 Evaluating Deductive Arguments II: Truth Functional Logic Invitation to Critical Thinking First Canadian Edition.
Symbolic Logic ⊃ ≡ · v ~ ∴. What is a logical argument? Logic is the science of reasoning, proof, thinking, or inference. Logic allows us to analyze a.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 7 Lecture Notes Chapter 7.
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.
Today’s Topics Argument forms and rules (review)
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapter 1 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
1 Propositional Proofs 1. Problem 2 Deduction In deduction, the conclusion is true whenever the premises are true.  Premise: p Conclusion: (p ∨ q) 
CT214 – Logical Foundations of Computing Darren Doherty Rm. 311 Dept. of Information Technology NUI Galway
Sound Arguments and Derivations. Topics Sound Arguments Derivations Proofs –Inference rules –Deduction.
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 =
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
Lecture Notes 8 CS1502.
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.
How do I show that two compound propositions are logically equivalent?
Demonstrating the validity of an argument using syllogisms.
Truth Tables How to build them
6.1 Symbols and Translation
Chapter 8 Logic Topics
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.
Section 3.5 Symbolic Arguments
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic 2012 Pearson Education, Inc.
3.5 Symbolic Arguments.
Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 1: Logic
Inference Rules: Tautologies
The Method of Deduction
Natural Deduction Hurley, Logic 7.1.
Statements of Symbolic Logic
Section 3.3 Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional
Truth Tables for the Conditional and Biconditional
8C Truth Tables, 8D, 8E Implications 8F Valid Arguments
Chapter 3 Introduction to Logic © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley.
3.5 Symbolic Arguments.
Truth Tables for Conditional and Biconditional Statements
Presentation transcript:

Uses for Truth Tables Determine the truth conditions for any compound statementDetermine the truth conditions for any compound statement Determine whether a statement is a tautology, a contradiction or neither,Determine whether a statement is a tautology, a contradiction or neither, Determine whether two formulae are equivalent.Determine whether two formulae are equivalent. Determine whether an argument is valid or not.Determine whether an argument is valid or not.

Logical Implication n One statement logically implies another if, but only if, whenever the first is true, the second is true as well n If a statement, S 1, implies S 2 then the conditional (S 1  S 2 ) will be a tautology. Implication is the validity of the conditional. n Truth tables allow one to test for logical implication

Validity and Logical Implication n An argument is valid if, but only if, its premises logically imply its conclusion.

Deductive Validity n A characteristic of arguments in which the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. n A characteristic of arguments in which the premises logically imply the conclusion.

Truth Table Tests for Validity n n Construct a column for each premise in the argument n n Construct a column for the conclusion n n Examine each row of the truth table. Is there a row in which all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. If so, the argument is non- valid. If not, then the argument is valid.

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, R  S Modus Ponens (MP) R  S R  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1  S S Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid? T T  T   T T  T T T VALID NO

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, S  R Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent R  S S  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1 RR Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid? T YES NON-VALID T  T  T  T   T T

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, ~S  ~R Modus Tollens (MT) R  S ~S  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1  ~R Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid? T T  T T  T  T T   VALID NO

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, ~R  ~S Evil Twin of Modus Toll ens R  S ~R~R  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1  ~S Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid? T T  T T T   T  T  NON-VALID YES

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, ~R  S Disjunctive Syllogism (DS) R  S  ~R  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1  S Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid?  T T T T T   T  T VALID NO

Truth-Table Test for Validity for R  S, R  ~S R  SR  T  T S  4  3 T2 T1 ~S~S Rcase Is there a case in which the premises are all true but the conclusion is false? Is the argument form valid or non-valid?  YES NON-VALID T T T   T T T  T 

Key Ideas n Grouping and Meaning n Paraphrasing Inward n Truth Functional Operators n Truth Tables Using Truth TablesUsing Truth Tables Testing for tautologies and contradictionsTesting for tautologies and contradictions Testing for equivalenceTesting for equivalence n Testing for validity