# Correct way to write statement using symbols?

I would like to write the following using logic symbols but am unfamiliar with the practice. Here is the statement:

If it is accepted that life will arise from matter given the right conditions and if it is accepted that intelligence will arise from life given the right conditions and if it is accepted that consciousness will arise from intelligence given the right conditions then it can be concluded that consciousness will arise from matter given the right conditions.

• Too long... in evry case, start listing predicates with the right arity. Sep 1 at 17:08
• Could you re-write the statement with the right arity so I can better understand your comment? As I mentioned I am unfamiliar with the practice. Thanks. Sep 1 at 17:33
• If you do not know symbolic logic, maybe it helps to start with simpler examplex: All men are mortals. Sep 2 at 6:10
• Depends on what logic you choose, Aristotles syllogism used propositions with 1 subject and 1 predicate. Freges and russles used a different form too Sep 3 at 11:52

"The right conditions" = R (but see the comment below, it's problematic to assume this can be represented with one variable)

Matter = M

Life = L

Intelligence = I

Consciousness = C

"x gives rise to y" = A(x, y)

Using -> for material implication, & for logical conjunction:

[ (R -> A(M, L)) & (R -> A(L, I)) & (R -> A(I, C)) ] -> (R -> A(M, C))

This is a true statement if we also assume that A(x, y) & A(y, z) -> A(x, z) for any x and y.

However, there is an issue about R. Are "the right conditions" to evolve life from matter, really the same "right conditions" to evolve consciousness from intelligence? It seems we might more accurately have four separate "right conditions," one condition for evolving life from matter, one for evolving intelligence from life, one for evolving consciousness from intelligence, and one for evolving intelligence from matter. And if we do that, then the statement is no longer necessarily true.

We could, however, interpret "the right conditions" as the combination of all conditions needed to evolve life from matter, intelligence from life, and consciousness from intelligence. Under this interpretation we can use a single R, and the statement is true.

• Thank you for your answer and comment regarding R. I had assumed that R, "the right conditions", could be understood to be unique in each case but I can appreciate your point that symbolic logic is intended to eliminate ambiguity. Sep 1 at 17:44
• @NetCentric as I said, if the right conditions are assumed to be unique in each case then the statement is not necessarily true. For example, if the conditions to evolve life from matter are mutually exclusive with the conditions to evolve intelligence from life, then there won't be any path to evolve consciousness from matter. Sep 1 at 18:10
• Ah. Now I understand. Thanks again. Sep 1 at 18:19