Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Here he says that:
If you have A is sufficient for B it means that every time you have A you will have B, without exception: A -> B
If you have A is necessary for B it means that every time you have B you will have A, without exception A <- B
But I'm in doubt on what truth tables does each one holds. Can someone help me?
A -> B is just implication:
A B A -> B
t t t
t f f
f t t
f f t
A <- B is the same as B -> A, so the above truth table holds, but with different variable names.
A -> B means: "When A is true, then B is also true." That is not the same as "If, and only if, A is true, then B is true." When A is false, B may be either true or false, and the implication is still true. For example, take the implication: "When it rains, the street is wet." Now, what do we know about the street when it doesn't rain? Nothing! The street could be either dry or wet – maybe because someone is washing his car. In the second row, A is true but B is false, but we want B to be true, whenever A is true. Thus the implication is false.
A -> B doesn't mean "B because A" or something like that. It's really just "If A, then B", nothing more, nothing less. So, whenever A is false, B's value doesn't matter, the implication is true. If B is true, A's value doesn't matter, because the only case in which the implication could possibly become false needs a false B. That means A -> B is the same as -A v B ("not A or B"). Search for a nice introductory logic tutorial, if you're interested in this. It's too much to cover thoroughly in a few comments.