Questions about truth tables, conjunctive and disjunctive normal forms, negation, and implication of unquantified propositions would fit very nicely under this tag. Questions about other kind of logics should be tagged with [logic] instead.

learn more… | top users | synonyms (1)

39
votes
16answers
3k views

In classical logic, why is$ (p\Rightarrow q)$ True if both p and q are False?

I am studying entailment in classical first-order logic. The Truth Table we have been presented with for the statement $(p \Rightarrow q)\;$ (a.k.a. '$p$ implies $q$') is: ...
4
votes
4answers
4k views

What is the name of the logical puzzle, where one always lies and another always tells the truth?

So i was solving exercises in propositional logic lately and stumbled upon a puzzle, that goes like this: Each inhabitant of a remote village always tells the truth or always lies. A villager will ...
10
votes
7answers
8k views

Not understanding this row of truth table for logical implication

Provided we have this truth table where "$p\implies q$" means "if $p$ then $q$": $$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline p&q&p\implies q\\ \hline T&T&T\\ T&F&F\\ F&T&T\\ ...
6
votes
4answers
372 views

Equivalence of $a \rightarrow b$ and $\lnot a \vee b$

Is there a proof for the logical equivalence of $a \rightarrow b$ and $\lnot a \vee b$?
11
votes
2answers
1k views

Do De Morgan's laws hold in propositional intuitionistic logic?

In Wikipedia page on intuitionistic logic, it is stated that excluded middle and double negation elimination are not axioms. Does this mean that De Morgan's laws, stated $$ \lnot (p \land q) \iff ...
5
votes
4answers
613 views

What is a constructive proof of $\lnot\lnot(P\vee\lnot P)$?

Glivenko's theorem says that $\lnot\lnot P$ is a theorem of intuitionistic logic whenever $P$ is a theorem of classical logic. Is it closely related to the so-called Gödel–Gentzen negative translation ...
7
votes
5answers
1k views

Help to understand material implication

This question comes from from my algebra paper: $(p \rightarrow q)$ is logically equivalent to ... (then four options are given). The module states that the correct option is $(\sim p \lor q)$. ...
4
votes
3answers
160 views

Natural Deduction Tautology

I'm trying to prove the following tautologies: \begin{align} & ⊢ (A \to (B \to A)) \\ & ⊢ ((A \to B) \to A) \to A \end{align} For the first one, what I did was: $A$ assumption $B$ ...
2
votes
1answer
212 views

How do I Prove the Theorems Needed for “The Deduction Meta-Theorem” from CδCpqCpδq?

I use Polish notation. δ stands for a variable function (or functor) of one argument. A section of Lukasiewicz's book on Aristotle's syllogistic from the modern point of view reads: "I should like ...
1
vote
1answer
186 views

How to prove Lemma 2.12 of Mendelson without Deduction Theorem

My question refers to Bourbaki's axiom system in Nicolas Bourbaki, Théorie des ensembles (1970). [page I.25] : $(P \lor P) \supset P$ --- (Taut) $Q \supset (P \lor Q)$ --- (Add) $(P \lor Q) ...
1
vote
1answer
59 views

How to find if a valuation satisfies a statement?

I'm working on a task which i'm a bit stuck at. I need to decide whether the statements are true or fale. F stands for the statement logical formulas, and also if the claim is true I need to give a ...
0
votes
1answer
90 views

How make equivalent transformations?

Please, help me make equivalent transformations with this formula (A∨C→B)(A→C)(¬B→¬A∧C)(¬A→(C→B))(B→¬C→¬A). Thanks.
15
votes
8answers
1k views

Assumed True until proven False. The Curious Case of the Vacuous Truth

Given two statements, $P$ and $Q$, and the logical connective, $\implies$, the truth table for $P \implies Q$ is: $$\begin{array}{ c | c || c | } P & Q & P\Rightarrow Q \\ \hline \text T ...
4
votes
2answers
342 views

How Many Theorems (Tautologies) Exist of 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 Letters?

Suppose we only have the material conditional C and logical negation N for a system of propositional calculus, with only variables and no constants in any formula. Suppose that formulas like Cpq ...
0
votes
1answer
57 views

Does $\neg(x > y)$ imply that $y \geq x$?

Given any arbitrary binary relation $\geq$ defined on some set $S$, we define a new binary relation $>$ on $S$ by: $$ x > y \quad\text{iff}\quad (x \geq y) \wedge \neg(y \geq x) $$ In accordance ...
7
votes
3answers
549 views

Why Peirce's law implies law of excluded middle?

Why if in a formal system the Peirce's law $((P\rightarrow Q)\rightarrow P) \rightarrow P$ is true, the law of excluded middle $P \lor \neg P$ is true too?
5
votes
3answers
2k views

Express logic puzzles with proposition calculus notation

I’m trying to solve a logic puzzle that goes like this: The police have three suspects for the murder of Mr. Cooper: Mr. Smith, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Williams. Smith, Jones, and Williams each declare ...
3
votes
5answers
472 views

Intuition of implication in propositional logic

So, in all the books on propositional logic, I feel unsatisfied with the "intuition" about the meaning of the implication connective. I completely understand how the mechanics work via truth tables, ...
2
votes
3answers
187 views

Logical Equivalence and Corresponding English Statements

Consider the statement, "If it is Tuesday, then it is raining"; in propositional logic, the statement would read as, "$p \implies q$." Now, in accordance with the rules and definitions prescribed in ...
1
vote
1answer
80 views

In Fitch, is a symbol not in a specified language automatically free?

In Fitch proofs where no language has been specified, we (at least seem to) treat lines that have the form $$p(x)$$ to mean that $x$ "can be anything". That is they are equivalent to $$\forall ...
8
votes
2answers
10k views

How to convert to conjunctive normal form?

If i have a formula: $((a \wedge b) \vee (q \wedge r )) \vee z$, am I right in thinking the CNF for this formula would be $(a\vee q \vee r \vee z) \wedge (b \vee q \vee r \vee z) $? Or is there some ...
4
votes
3answers
136 views

A question about Implicational Propositional Calculus

My question is motivated by a previous post about Implicational calculus Having showed that Mendelson (A1) and (A2) axioms plus Peirce's law are a complete axiom set for implicational fragment of ...
3
votes
5answers
683 views

Tautology, Contradiction, or a satisfiable equation? Confusion about implication.

I'm having some trouble with a homework question. I have the following $ P \rightarrow \neg P$ This looks like a contradiction to me. This should never be true! Yet, if I transform it using $p ...
2
votes
5answers
92 views

Showing that $\lnot Q \lor (\lnot Q \land R) = \lnot Q$ without a truth table

I've done a truth table after reducing it to this and it seems to be equal to $\neg Q$: $$\lnot Q \lor (\lnot Q \land R) = \lnot Q$$ But when I try to show it without a truth table (with just ...
1
vote
2answers
84 views

Deriving $\neg R$ from $\{R↔(R∨(P∧¬P)), R↔¬P, ¬P→(P↔(Q→Q)), P→Q\}$

Give a derivation of $\neg R$ from the following premises: $$\{R\leftrightarrow(R\lor(P\land \neg P)), R\leftrightarrow\neg P, \neg P\to(P\leftrightarrow(Q\to Q)), P\to Q\}$$ using the ...
16
votes
5answers
516 views

If both $P$ and $Q$ are true , how can I tell that $P$ implies $Q$?

I am trying to understand the fundamentals of mathematical logic in order to be able to study discrete mathematics and computer science soon. I have a big problem understanding Implication. I ...
18
votes
4answers
409 views

Associativity of $\iff$

In this answer, user18921 wrote that the $\iff$ operation is associative, in the sense that $(A\iff B)\iff C$ $A\iff (B\iff C)$ are equivalent statements. One can brute-force a proof fairly ...
6
votes
1answer
242 views

distribution of categorical product (conjunction) over coproduct (disjunction)

In the classical and intuitionistic propositional calculi, it is straightforward, using natural deduction, to derive $((A \land C) \lor (B \land C))$ from $(A \lor B) \land C$: Assume $(A \lor B) ...
4
votes
7answers
274 views

Conditional Statements: “only if”

For some reason, be it some bad habit or something else, I can not understand why the statement "p only if q" would translate into p implies q. For instance, I have the statement "Samir will attend ...
2
votes
2answers
202 views

Propositional Calculus and “Lazy evaluation”?

I want to formalize a system, and currently I don't know, if I can use propositional calculus in my case. At first, I though that I need a simple conjunction. $A \wedge B$ However, there is a ...
5
votes
2answers
1k views

What's the difference between a negation and a contrapositive?

What's the difference between a negation and a contrapositive? I keep mixing them up, but it seems that a contrapositive is a negation where the terms' order is changed and where there is an imply ...
5
votes
3answers
303 views

How complicated is the set of tautologies?

Consider the set $\mathcal T$ of all tautologies in the propositional calculus in which the only operators allowed are $\to$ and $\neg$, and involving only the two variables $x$ and $y$. How ...
3
votes
3answers
85 views

If $(A \vee B) \wedge (¬B \vee C)$ is true, then $(A \vee C)$ must be true … can I argue that?

If $(A \vee B) \wedge (¬B \vee C)$ is true, then $(A \vee C)$ must be true ... can I argue that? I don't see how I can argue that $(A \vee C)$ must be true because can't we have $(T \vee T) ...
2
votes
2answers
169 views

Proving and Modeling Logical Consistence

Suppose I have a finite list of logical statements (would these be called axioms?) and for the sake of discussion say that there are 6 such statements. All statements are in the form of propositional ...
2
votes
1answer
1k views

Relation between XOR and Symmetric difference

I noticed that XOR and symmetric difference use the same symbol, $\oplus$. They also seem to have a similar structure: XOR: $(\neg P\wedge Q)\vee(P\wedge \neg Q)$ Symmetric Difference: $(A\cap ...
1
vote
2answers
110 views

Definition of “contradiction” and use of the term for “⊥”

If one looks in Internet for definition of “contradiction” (including respective words in other languages), one finds a mess. See for example this index of Wikipedia articles in various languages. The ...
1
vote
1answer
62 views

Proving that a propositional theory of any cardinality has an independent set of axioms

This is exercise 1.2.19 from Chang & Keisler's Model Theory, which has been giving me a headache for some time now. Let $\mathscr{S}$ be a given propositional language of any cardinality (i.e. ...
0
votes
1answer
90 views

A finite set of wffs has an independent equivalent subset

This seems to be a common exercise among many books (cf. Enderton, p. 28, van Dalen, p. 45, Hinman, p. 51, Chang and Keisler, p. 18), with some minor variations among them. The idea is simple. Say ...
7
votes
7answers
3k views

Associativity of logical connectives

According to the precedence of logical connectives, operator $\rightarrow$ gets higher precedence than $\leftrightarrow$ operator. But what about associativity of $\rightarrow$ operator? The implies ...
6
votes
7answers
354 views

Intuition behind “If P then Q” = “Q or Not P ”

I understand with truth tables the Conditional Law: $[P \Longrightarrow Q] \equiv [\lnot P \vee Q]$. However, what's the intuition or a natural motivation? Source 1, all but intuitive, now appears as ...
6
votes
3answers
142 views

Equivalence relation using tableaux

How can I prove that two formulae are equivalent using analytic tableaux? For example, how can I prove the following theorem? $$ (p \rightarrow q) \equiv (\neg q \rightarrow \neg p)$$
5
votes
3answers
137 views

Can Peirce's Law be proven without contradiction?

Good evening, I heard the proof by contradiction is required for Peirce's law. AFAIK, truth tables are not related directly to proofs by contradiction, and if of an operation $\text {op}$ we have a ...
5
votes
1answer
257 views

What are a list of helpful boolean identities for solving boolean functions?

For instance, things like $P \Leftrightarrow Q \equiv (P \Rightarrow Q) \land (Q \Rightarrow P)$ is a very helpful formula to know, as is $P \Rightarrow Q \equiv \lnot P \lor Q$ is another helpful ...
4
votes
2answers
193 views

Natural deduction: $(\neg q \to\neg p)\vdash(p\to q)$ without Modus Tollens

Can anyone help me to obtain this result in natural deduction, without using modus tollens: $$(\neg q \to \neg p) \vdash ( p \to q)$$
4
votes
2answers
373 views

Disjunction in Intuitionistic Logic, what about $((P \to U \lor V) \to Z)$

I wonder whether the following holds in intuitionistic logic: $$((P \to U \lor V) \to Z) \leftrightarrow ((P \to U) \to Z) \land ((P \to V) \to Z)$$ For disjunction I assume the following two rules: ...
3
votes
2answers
127 views

Model-theory and Proof-theory in Propositional Logic

I'm trying to link results of model theory and proof-theory in propositional language. Here i will use $\models$ to denote logical consequence, in the model-theory sense. Being $x,y$ two formulas of ...
3
votes
3answers
253 views

Proof of $A \lor B, \lnot A\models B$ with natural deduction

Prove that: $A \lor B, \lnot A\models B$ Looks easy but im stuck, and i dont know if to start with an OR elimination or with NOT introduction. Also, different books/texts/etc about Natural ...
3
votes
4answers
215 views

Proving $q\Rightarrow r \models (p\land q) \Rightarrow (p \land r)$ using only natural deduction.

I'm trying to prove $$q\Rightarrow r \models (p\land q) \Rightarrow (p \land r)$$ using only the natural deduction rules in this handout. Any hints? I am not allowed to do transformational stuff, ...
3
votes
0answers
59 views

Boolean combinatorics

Every finite Boolean algebra has a "middle layer", corresponding to the subsets of size $n/2$ (when looking at the algebra of subsets of $[n]$) or to a set of formulas including $p_i, \neg p_i, p_i ...