Questions tagged [predicate-logic]
The predicate-logic tag has no usage guidance.
45
questions
2
votes
2
answers
119
views
ZFC Axioms and First Order Logic
I have never been formally trained in logic and philosophy. I became increasingly interested in the foundation of mathematics after I graduated from university.
Recently, I've been self-studying ZFC ...
0
votes
1
answer
35
views
Instantiation of the statement : (x)Px ∨ (x)Qx [closed]
1.(x)Px ∨ (x)Qx
I am currently reading a logic book by Patrick J. Hurley, and in the book the author says that we can't universally instantiate a statement like statement 1. Specifically, he says that ...
- 17
1
vote
2
answers
60
views
Help needed with predicate interpretations- Wilfrid Hodges logic
I was going through Hodges' Introduction to Elementary Logic and was rather puzzled by a section where one is asked to translate an argument into a predicate interpretation.
The entire thing reads:
...
- 11
2
votes
3
answers
133
views
Philosophy book written using logic statements
I would like to translate a philosophy text into logic axioms and propositions. Then, I would like to use prolog to check if the text is logically consistent.
However, I find it difficult to translate ...
-1
votes
3
answers
119
views
Translation of Arguments from Propositional Logic to Predicate Logic
How exactly does this work? What can we assume stays the same, what changes?
Take for an example this (valid) argument:
A & ~C
~C > ~D
~D > B
∴ B
Now let us take rewrite it according to ...
- 249
0
votes
1
answer
39
views
At most one relations: using Negation Vs Implication
I am trying to come to terms with expressing using quantifiers using various examples.
My question here is about a general approach for expressing at-most one relations in logical language.
For ...
- 103
0
votes
1
answer
54
views
Natural Deduction Proof with double quantifier (predicate logic) [closed]
Premise: (∃y)(∀x)(Px v Py)
Conclusion: ~(∀y)(~Py)
I'm starting out assuming the negation, i.e., (∀y)(~Py).
But then I'm unsure how to find a contradiction within that subderivation. Here's what I've ...
2
votes
1
answer
109
views
Understanding the syntax of subsitution
I have a question about the meaning and semantics of substitution, I apologise if this is off-topic but I thought here would be the best place as it's more about the semantics and meaning than any ...
- 825
1
vote
0
answers
94
views
Nested Quantifiers Proof - Logic
When I prove this: -∃x.P(x) ⊢ ∀x.-P(x) [True]
I did it like that:
∀x.-P(x) ⊢ ∀x.-P(x) because (negative ∃) -∃x.P(x) becomes ∀x.-P(x) so that we can say that it's true.
However, I didn't ...
- 11
0
votes
1
answer
54
views
Proof of the Model Universe Theorem: Proving the invalidity arguments in quantifier logic
I am studying how to prove an argument in quantifier logic is invalid. The textbook I am using by Virginia Klenk claims that you can use a Model Universe that contains a finite number of objects to ...
- 101
-2
votes
1
answer
146
views
Help me solve this predicate logic proof theory: -(∀z)(∃y)Tzy ⊢ (∃z)(∀y)-Tzy
-(∀z)(∃y)Tzy ⊢ (∃z)(∀y)-Tzy
Using Lande, (AI,EI,AE,EE,->E,->I,-I,--E,^I,^E,vI,vE) I cannot figure out the proof on this sequent.
- 1
2
votes
0
answers
59
views
Could we supply logics make quantification over logical constants?
In first order logic, we make quantification over individuals, and in second order logic, we make quantification over properties. So could we supply logics make quantification over logical constants, ...
- 508
0
votes
0
answers
148
views
Is ∀x x = x a first-order validity or simply a logical truth (that is not a first-order validity?
I've been wondering about this. The textbook ''Language, Proof and Logic'' defines a first-order validity as the following:
''A sentence of FOL is a first-order validity if it is a logical truth when ...
2
votes
2
answers
108
views
Is al-Farabi right that predicates must add information and existence is not a predicate?
Al-Farabi claimed that existence is not a predicate, because "exists" as in "Apple is red and exists." doesn't bring any new information, but does a predicate have to bring in a ...
- 2,010
0
votes
2
answers
270
views
Is categorical logic the same as predicate logic
In philosophical logic, categorical logic is the logic that deals with the logical relationship between categorical statements. I wonder if categorical logic is considered the same as predicate logic (...
anon
0
votes
0
answers
64
views
Is the following derivation of predicate logic correct?
I recently discovered https://proofs.openlogicproject.org/, except I'm still figuring out the appropriate rules that are needed for the system to check my proof. I thought it'd be quicker to turn to ...
- 9
1
vote
1
answer
71
views
Checking translations of predicate logic
Let Dx = "x is a detective", U12 = "1 is the uncle of 2", and appropriate lowercase letters for names.
If there are any detectives, John is the only detective.
No detective is ...
- 9
0
votes
0
answers
47
views
Are ontic predicates similarly (or even well) defined across philosophers? Do they differ from logic predicates?
I've seen the term "ontic predicate" bandied around in some works. Whenever it has a clear definition it seem no different than how one would define it in (first-order) logic, i.e. it being ...
- 1,817
1
vote
1
answer
119
views
ontological commitments to properties
Quine's famous thesis about ontological commitment is roughly the following: there exist only entities which fall under the domain of quantification of our theory and that can be the values of ...
- 395
-2
votes
2
answers
161
views
How to prove ∀x∃y(Fx→Gy) ⊢ ∃y∀x(Fx→Gy) using natural deduction? [closed]
∀x∃y(Fx→Gy) ⊢ ∃y∀x(Fx→Gy)
I tried to use reductio ad absurdum by assuming ¬∃y∀x(Fx→Gy) and then using quantifier negation to simplify it further, but it got very messy when I had to use ∃-elimination ...
- 1
0
votes
1
answer
48
views
Question about proving a set that is quantificationally inconsistent in PD+ (Finished the proof but want it to be checked)
Does ∃x(Nx & ~Nx) contradiction itself?
Is there an error in my proof?
Thank you
- 3
-1
votes
2
answers
90
views
2
votes
2
answers
146
views
Can 'All S is P' ever be false if S is empty?
I'm self-learning logic, I'm stuck on an issue similar to this question: In modern logic, why does "All S is P" contradict "Some S is not P"?
In the boolean interpretation 'All S ...
- 123
3
votes
5
answers
426
views
Why is first-order logic interesting to philosophers?
This site had a question: Is First Order Logic (FOL) the only fundamental logic?
Let me ask the opposite: Why is FOL still interesting or useful to philosophers? For example, the "ancestor" ...
- 453
0
votes
4
answers
602
views
Why is the notion of domain of discourse at all necessary in predicate logic?
The notion of domain of discourse (also: domain of discourse, universe of discourse, universal set, or universe) is a fixture of mathematical logic which is sometimes claimed to be necessary to the ...
- 4,942
4
votes
1
answer
377
views
What are the advantages of Aristotle's term logic over predicate logic?
I have read Wikipedia's term logic entry, and the quote by Gareth Evans in the Revival section that's supposed to argue for term logic's advantages over predicate logic:
"I come to semantic ...
- 453
2
votes
1
answer
92
views
What are some of the struggles that come with teaching formal logic? [closed]
I'm currently an undergraduate student who wants to do research on the pedagogy of formal logic. As a result, I wanted to know what are some challenges that instructors (or even students for that ...
11
votes
1
answer
2k
views
How do you differentiate between At least one X and Exactly one X in predicate logic?
Here are the following two sentences.
At least one person speaks English.
∃𝑥E(x)
Exactly one person speaks English.
Instead of ∃𝑥E(x), what do I write?
0
votes
1
answer
78
views
What is the difference between p ∧ (p → q) and p → q?
I understand why with a truth table p ∧ (p → q) and p → q are different but from a semantic point they look exactly the same to me. At a glance from a semantics point they look like they should have ...
- 101
1
vote
0
answers
35
views
Can you universally specify using a proper name that is already present in the premise?
i was working on one of the problems in Patrick Suppes' An Introduction to logic, and it asks to show whether "Ptah is an egyptian god. Ptah is the father of all egytpian gods. Therefore Ptah is the ...
2
votes
3
answers
230
views
Is ¬(a = b) the same as (a ≠ b) in logic
Are these the same in predicate logic with identity:
¬ (a = b)
a ≠ b
I'm not quite sure whether they can be used interchangeably in proofs.
Any help would be great!
- 29
1
vote
1
answer
47
views
How does identity work in modal predicate logic?
Namely how can we can have a correspondence between objects in different possible worlds if they are different?
If we have two worlds in S5
aw0(P(x)) = 1 and aw1(P(x)) = 0
How can we 'identify' x ...
-2
votes
2
answers
113
views
Predicate Logic
How do I derive this?
Pr 1 ∀x(Fx -> ∀xGx)
∴ ∀x(Fx -> ∀x(Gx \ / Hx))
My attempt:
However I cannot used universal derivation due to the free x. I think using ass id and qn would be better ...
- 15
0
votes
1
answer
104
views
Predicate Logic Proof Help! ∃xAx ∨ ∃yFy , ∀x(Ax → Fx) |= ∃xFx [closed]
I am unable to prove it :(
I think I need to assume - ∃xFx but what follows later on?
user46149
0
votes
1
answer
103
views
Predicate Logic - Are these two sentences equivalent?
Could you tell me if these two sentences are equivalent? If they aren't, what would be the correct sentence that is equivalent to (1)? Please explain. Thank you!
(1) (∀x)[Ax→(∃y)(By & Txy)]
(2) (...
- 1
0
votes
1
answer
35
views
Homework Question on Quantified Logic Falsehood
For one of my homework challenge questions, I have a true or false type question. The question is as follows:
True or False:
I'm not particularly sure how to solve this. I have no information about ...
- 3
0
votes
1
answer
240
views
Question about v-variants of variable assignments
In Full Predicate Calculus, some variable assignment q satisfies a disjunction under interpretation U if q satisfies one or both disjuncts under U, it satisfies a conjunction under interpretation U if ...
0
votes
1
answer
32
views
Having trouble translating english to FOL
Having trouble with this phrase: Any column that contains a cube contains a tetrahedron, and vice versa.
I tried this:
∀x ∀y ((Cube(x) ∧ Tet(y)) → SameCol(x, y))
which is incorrect because this says ...
- 39
1
vote
2
answers
108
views
Truth Value of Definite Descriptions
I'm currently studying definite descriptions in logic. My textbook postulates Bertrand Russell's view of definite descriptions, but I'm curious about other views as well (in the context of classical 2-...
- 297
0
votes
1
answer
76
views
SELF-REFERENCE AND THE LANGUAGES OF ARITHMETIC
Hello can someone explain me exacty how in this fragment of the paper (SELF-REFERENCE AND THE LANGUAGES OF ARITHMETIC, RICHARDG.HECK,JR.):
(9) Tr(x) ≡∃y(rhs(x,y)∧¬Tr(y)), where rhs(x,y) is a formula ...
- 47
4
votes
1
answer
389
views
Proof Using Model Universe
Suppose I am trying to prove the following argument
(∀x)(Cx → Dx), (∀x)(Ex → ~Dx), /∴ (∀x)(Ex → ~Cx)
Now, let's also assume that I don't know if this argument is valid or not. Because of this, I try ...
- 297
1
vote
1
answer
159
views
What are some benefits of a second order logic?
I have read that a second-order logic can help one define equality by quantifying over all predicates such as what is done in the following definition:
(x=y):⟺[∀P:P(x)⟺P(y)]
By contrast a first-...
- 19.1k
0
votes
2
answers
141
views
How does one tell if logical expressions are equivalent?
How do I check if these expressions are equivalent?
∀a,b [P(a) ∧ ¬R(a) ∧ S(b)] → G(a,b)
∀a [(P(a) ∧ ¬R(a)) → (∀b [S(b) → G(a,b)])]
- 11
5
votes
2
answers
427
views
Is it possible to construct infinitely many non-equivalent formulas in predicate logic?
In the language of predicate logic with only identity and no predicates, function
symbols, or constants, is it possible to construct infinitely many non-equivalent
formulas?
3
votes
2
answers
347
views
Are there paradoxes involved in allowing for an unrestricted domain in predicate logic?
I've put some thought into this, and just want to make sure I'm on track, or if I need to be corrected. Basically, my answer is this: Yes, you need to always specify a domain when formalizing into ...
- 1,229