0
$\begingroup$

I understand the whole process of validating propositional logic. However, for this following question, am not too sure of the compound propositions of each line

I am assuming

No fish are forgetful (~p)

Nobody but fish have scales (q)

--

Nobody forgetful has scales (~p => q)

is that right?

Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Those sentences don't sound like something one would use propositional logic to model ... $\endgroup$ – hmakholm left over Monica Nov 8 '14 at 20:33
  • $\begingroup$ @HenningMakholm it is in the exercise for PL, unfortunately so there must be some way this can be interpreted that I'm not getting $\endgroup$ – LucasCK Nov 8 '14 at 20:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is not propositional logic; it is an example of Syllogism (in modern term : monadic predicate logic) : "No F are P", "All S are F"; therefore : "No P are S". $\endgroup$ – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Nov 8 '14 at 20:47
1
$\begingroup$

The only way I can see to shoehorn this into propositional logic would be to work with an implicit subject and let the propositional variables be:

  • $S$ meaning "it has scales"
  • $P$ meaning "it's forgetful"
  • $M$ meaning "it's a fish"

in which case the reasoning could be written as

$$ \frac{\neg(M \land P) \qquad \qquad S\to M}{\neg(S\land P)} $$

which corresponds to the classical "Cellarent" sylogism, if we rephrase it slightly as:

  • No fish is forgetful
  • All things with scales are fish
  • Therefore: Nothing that has scales is forgetful

In modern mathematical logic, however, it would be much more natural to express it in predicate logic, where the reasoning would look like

$$\frac{ \neg\exists x(M(x)\land P(x)) \qquad \qquad \neg\exists x(\neg M(x)\land S(x))} {\neg\exists x(P(x)\land S(x))} $$

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

This appears to require predicate logic to validate.

Can you provide some more background on where this question comes from? For example, if this is from a textbook, what section is it associated with? What are some other problems from that section? What are some sample solutions they provide, if any?

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ this was a question from my lecture notes on validity of propositional logic although it does start to look like it shouldn't belong there. No sample solutions. $\endgroup$ – LucasCK Nov 8 '14 at 21:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.