Link between Propositional Logic and mathematical statements

I understand how in propositional logic, every proposition is a statement that is either TRUE or FALSE, and we can make use of logical connectors to turn separate propositions into fromulas which intern are more complex propositions.

My question is, just to see if i get this right: Is any proposition (be it a compound of predicates with quantors or just the basic well-formed formula), that's written down without any indication of its truth value, assumed to be true?

This would clarify why in higher level math topics (depending on formal logic and axiomatic set theory, like real analysis, linear algebra, etc..), when we state a theorem, we only write down a proposition without specifying truth values.

• Can you give a specific example? Commented Jan 31, 2022 at 22:56
• @MarkSaving For instance if i see $\forall x, (x \in \emptyset \lor x \notin \emptyset)$ in a textbook i simply read it as being true but from a formal logic standpoint, I've read that any proposition is either True or False. So i was wondering if there's a convention for the case where people don't explicitly state the truth value Commented Jan 31, 2022 at 23:10
• I didn’t mean, “Give me an example of a proposition.” I meant, “Give me an example of a proposition in the context that you are seeing them in the textbook.” Commented Jan 31, 2022 at 23:37
• When in a textbook we state a Theorem, we are asserting it as TRUE, because the proof follows the statement: maybe it is left as exercise, or it is "left to the reader" because it is quite simply. Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 9:43