1

I have the following sentence which I want to formalize in predicate modal logic. The sentence is:

What is good for you is not necessarily good for others"

My attempt at formalizing this is as follows with Gx be the predicate - Good for x:

∀x ∀y (Gx → (~(x=y) ∧ ~□Gy))

3

I see two problems with the current formulation. First, 'good for' (in the sense that you mean) is a 2-place predicate, as in 'tea is good for Alice' and 'coffee is good for Bob'. Second, your formulation entails that if something is good for x, then ~(x=y). But of course x=y in some cases, since those variables range over the same individuals.

So I would formalize "What is good for you is not necessarily good for others" as follows:

∀x∀y∀z((Gxy & ~(y=z)) → ~□Gxz)

The following should be equivalent (though I'm not 100% sure). It formalizes "it's not necessary that: everything that is good for you is good for others".

~□∀x∀y∀z((Gxy & ~(y=z)) → Gxz)

| improve this answer | |
  • I think your last comment in your answer depends on the particular PML you are using. – MathematicalPhysicist Oct 29 '19 at 5:42

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.