Questions tagged [symbolic-logic]

For questions related to symbolic logic, also known as mathematical logic. Topics might range from philosophical implications of metamathematical results to technical questions.

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
21 votes
7 answers
6k views

Selection of logical connectives {¬,∨,∧,⇒,⇔} in set theory?

Nearly every treatment of set theory, whether Paul Halmos' Naive Set Theory, Herbert Enderton's Elements of Set Theory, Patrick Suppes' Axiomatic Set Theory, etc. introduce a common set of logical ...
user avatar
18 votes
10 answers
18k views

What is the difference between Law of Excluded Middle and Principle of Bivalence?

Law of Excluded Middle: In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) is the third of the so-called three classic laws of thought. It states that for any proposition, ...
user avatar
  • 967
12 votes
9 answers
8k views

How to prove (A v B), (A → C), (B → D) therefore (C v D)

Obviously since A → C and B → D then if A v B one of C or D must be true. My only idea is v must be introduced, but how would I use subproofs to show one of A /\ C or B /\ D is never false if A v B?
user avatar
  • 137
10 votes
2 answers
8k views

What's the difference among the logical relations :=, =, and ≡?

I understand that ≡ is logical equivalence, "iff". '=' is a symbol for numerical equivalence. And ':=' is an identity claim. I often only see '=' and ':=' used with variables and names, ...
user avatar
7 votes
3 answers
684 views

Is it true that (P∧Q≡P)⇔(Q≡⊤)?

Consider the statement (P∧Q≡P)⇔(Q≡⊤) Where P and Q are statements, and ⊤ denotes the tautology (true) statement. It seems intuitively true that the above biconditional statement is true. But I ...
user avatar
7 votes
2 answers
722 views

Why aren't Kripke semantics "syntax in disguise"?

The Wikipedia article on Kripke semantics suggests that they were considered a major breakthrough in part because algebraic semantics were seen as merely "syntax in disguise". But Kripke ...
user avatar
7 votes
2 answers
425 views

How did symbolic logic show that Heidegger's assertions about the nothing were illogical?

In his inaugural address at Freiburg University in 1929, Heidegger explicitly challenged the central place given to logical principles in neo-Kantianism, on the basis of a radical account of ‘the ...
user avatar
7 votes
2 answers
465 views

What exactly is a first-order logic?

Can someone explain in simple terms what exactly is a first-order logic? From my amateur standpoint, I think that first-order logic is a some kind of a system of symbols and general logical rules and ...
user avatar
  • 313
7 votes
2 answers
231 views

How do proofs about logic fit into a logical framework?

I'm learning logic from Michael O'Leary's A First Course in Mathematical Logic and Set Theory. In chapter 1 he carefully explains the meaning of logical implication (p ⊨ q), logical inference (p ⟹ q), ...
user avatar
  • 343
6 votes
8 answers
3k views

What is the explicit reasoning behind proof by contradiction?

From my understanding, proof by contradiction consists of the following steps. 1. Show that p -> q, where "->" is the conditional. 2. Show that q is false. 3. Deduce from a truth table that p must be ...
user avatar
6 votes
3 answers
2k views

In Fitch, how does one prove "(P → Q)" from the premise "(¬P ∨ Q)"?

It's all in the question really. I am working on a proof in Fitch for a class, but I am very much stuck. I am proving the tautology that "(P → Q) ↔ (¬P ∨ Q)", and I have already finished half of it, ...
user avatar
  • 61
6 votes
3 answers
177 views

How to model "forget about" in first order logic?

The other day, my housemate said "Don't forget to not leave the spoon at the bottom of the container". I understood what he meant: "Do not leave the spoon at the bottom of the ...
user avatar
6 votes
4 answers
982 views

What does the truth-value of a material implication represent?

This question comes from my attempts to understand what the truth value for a material implication with a false antecedent represents. I have seen several justifications for this convention, usually ...
user avatar
5 votes
2 answers
686 views

Are contradictory propositions in the propositional logic still contradictory in the predicate logic?

There is one seeming issue I happened upon that bothers me to no end. Take a proposition like “Snow is white”. “Snow is white” and its negation “Snow is not white” are obviously contradictory. However,...
user avatar
  • 63
5 votes
1 answer
697 views

Why does Gensler's Star Test not work on some syllogisms? [duplicate]

All teachers are intelligent. All teachers are well-paid. From the Star Test, we can deduce that the argument must be invalid with whatever conclusion (according to the classical syllogism figures), ...
user avatar
5 votes
3 answers
2k views

What exactly are the identity rules in logic?

In first order logic, I have read that there are a couple of identity rules. If I have "a=b" does it mean that I can also write it as "b=a"? Is it true one-way or both? And if I have two ...
user avatar
  • 527
5 votes
2 answers
372 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?
user avatar
5 votes
3 answers
4k views

Propositional Logic: How to prove the contraposition in the Fitch system?

Given that: p ⇒ q prove that: ¬q ⇒ ¬p using the Fitch system. (This being the proof of the Contraposition)
user avatar
  • 91
5 votes
1 answer
178 views

Can/Do there exist any quantifiers other than "there exists" and "for all"?

I'm curious about why there are only the two logical quantifiers there exists and for all. Intuition and human language support the idea that these quantifiers make sense, but otherwise it seems ...
user avatar
  • 343
5 votes
1 answer
683 views

What is the logical law proving "if not p then q" is equivalent to "p or q"?

I know that (¬p → q) ≡ (p v q) from comparing the truth tables. But is there a law that states this? Something like the laws of propositional logic: idempotent, associative, commutative, distributive, ...
user avatar
5 votes
2 answers
118 views

Why is the law of the excluded middle not a exclusive disjunction?

So the law of the excluded middle, as I have read in every logic textbook that I have read, has been ( ϕ ∨ ¬ ϕ ) , but this seems somewhat unintuitive, since I was under the impression that the ...
user avatar
4 votes
6 answers
2k views

How to show that (P & Q) v (~P v ~ Q) is a theorem in SD

I’m working on a practice question on my logic textbook. And I’m stuck at this question. This is what I have so far: 1. ~(P & Q) Assumption/ Negated Eelimination 2. P Assumption/...
user avatar
  • 43
4 votes
2 answers
2k views

What does the symbol ":=" mean in formal logic?

:= What does the "colon-equal symbol" mean, and how is it used?
user avatar
4 votes
4 answers
2k views

What is the difference between logical consistency and logical entailment in deductive logic?

I am having a little trouble sorting out two definitions from the first chapter in my logic textbook, The Logic Book by Bergmann, Moor and Nelson. I am under the impression that a set in a sentence ...
user avatar
  • 41
4 votes
1 answer
2k views

What, at present, are the major unsolved problems of logic?

In the 1900s, Hilbert published a list of 23 (later 24) unsolved problems in mathematics, which sparked increased research into each of them and the subsequent resolution of several of these problems. ...
user avatar
4 votes
3 answers
579 views

Symbolic Logic Proof: Leprechauns Exist?

I am reviewing a study guide for an introductory logic course (basic predicate, syllogistic etc.). The problem asks me to symbolize that "leprechauns exist" and prove that it is a logical truth and ...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
921 views

What does the colon (:) mean in conjunction with material implication?

Errol E. Harris does an excellent job of explaining dialectical logic in Formal, Transcendental, and Dialectical Thinking, but in the section on formal logic, he assumes a familiarity with symbolic ...
user avatar
4 votes
5 answers
790 views

Is there a logical symbol for "why"?

Is there a formal logic symbol for "why"? For example how would you formulate "Why is 2^4 > 4^2?" Could that be formulated in pure symbols of logic if possible? Also, the phrase "what is" can it be ...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
535 views

Subformulas of the WFF (∀x) ((∀y) ((x ∈ y) ∨ (y ∈ x )))

Consider the well-formed formula in set theory (∀x) ((∀y) ((x ∈ y) ∨ (y ∈ x ))). I believe there are 5 subformulas: (x ∈ y) (y ∈ x) ((x ∈ y)∨(y ∈ x)) (∀y) ((x ∈ y)∨(y ∈ x)) (∀x) ((∀y) ((x ∈ y)∨(y ∈ x)...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
142 views

need some guidance for this easy symbolic logic question [closed]

Every dog and cat who is well trained is a good pet. (F: a is a dog; G: a is a cat; H: a is well trained; I: a is a good pet.) Here are my options: a) ∀x((Fx∨Gx)∧Ix→Hx) b) ∀x((Fx∨Gx)∧Hx→Ix) c) ∀x(...
user avatar
4 votes
3 answers
367 views

P <=> (Q v R), P, -Q⊢R Propositional Logic Question

<=> is bi-conditional, "-" is negation, "v" is disjunction. I can't figure out where to take it from line 4. Negated Q is throwing me for a loop. P <=> (Q v R), P, -Q ⊢ R P <=> (Q v R) P ...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
3k views

Fitch style disjunction elimination

I am having difficulty in formally proving a simple argument. Consider P(x) v Q(x) not P(x) ---------- Q(x) It is easy to see that the argument is indeed valid, but I cannot seem to prove it ...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
126 views

help with deductive proof

∀x (Fx ∨ x=c), ¬Fb ∧ Gb |- ¬Fa → Ga So far I don't understand how to switch variables around to prove the result. I've got a subproof set up assuming "¬Fa" in order to derive "Ga". In that proof I ...
user avatar
  • 153
4 votes
5 answers
275 views

What would be an intuitive understanding of Peirce's law?

Wikipedia describes Peirce's law as In propositional calculus, Peirce's law says that ((P→Q)→P)→P. Written out, this means that P must be true if there is a proposition Q such that the truth of P ...
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
4k views

Fitch Proof - LPL Exercise 8.17

I am currently finding the third part of this exercise (Conditional 3) difficult to prove. I was sure that my proof was correct, but the Fitch program is saying otherwise. I am finding it ...
user avatar
  • 41
4 votes
1 answer
510 views

What it the relationship between Type theory and logic?

I am aware that a similar question was asked about the type theory in the principia, but I'm more interested in what the relationship between, say Martin-Lof Type theory and intuitionistic logic is.
user avatar
4 votes
2 answers
226 views

Can knowledge about argumentation be sufficient for philosophical logic without too symbolic or mathematical concepts?

The most important element for expression of truth is trough an argument, with premises and conclusion. Argumentation requires to avoid fallacies and adhere to the truth. However logic if treated as a ...
user avatar
  • 143
4 votes
1 answer
139 views

Prove ∀w(∀v((v=w∧φ(v))⇔φ(w)))

In this math question of mine, an answer pointed me to this theorem: ∀w(∀v((v=w∧φ(v))⇔φ(w))) which in turn, the answerer stated, implies another theorem: ∃v(v=t∧φ(v))⇔φ(t) which was the fact I ...
user avatar
4 votes
3 answers
2k views

Disjunctive Syllogism in a Fitch Style System

I'm trying to prove an argument of the form: B ~(C & B) Therefore: ~C. I can expand out ~(C & B) into ~C OR ~B, and with the premise B, it is clear that ~C is the case. ...
user avatar
  • 163
4 votes
1 answer
122 views

Are there famous unsolved problems in logic akin to the Millenium Prize problems?

Are there major theorems that logicians have yet to tackle? And I don't mean any problems that pertain to the philosophy of logic (i.e. logical pluralism, the nature of logical consequence, etc), but ...
user avatar
4 votes
1 answer
143 views

Is there a formalized logic for adpositional connectives?

Certain words in natural language are more amenable to logical formalization. The conjunction "and" or weak conditional "unless" are easily applied to break statements into their constituent atomic ...
user avatar
  • 2,385
3 votes
2 answers
342 views

Is there a uniform way of differentiating sufficient and necessary conditions?

I am struggling to formulate symbolic conditional logic rules from basic sentences (studying for the LSAT). It seems that subtle differences in syntax are throwing me off. Is the conditional ...
user avatar
3 votes
3 answers
4k views

Prove P v ~P using most basic rules?

Is there a way to prove P v ~P in basic inference rules? I can't think of where to start because nothing applies to this. I was thinking about usinig Conditional proof, but I don't know what should I ...
user avatar
3 votes
2 answers
580 views

meaning of (r .⊃. s ⊃ r) [the syntax meaning]

I'm trying to to determine whether the following is a tautology, contingency, or contradictory: (p ⊃ q) ∨ (q ⊃ p) .⊃. (r .⊃. s ⊃ r) This is school work. I'm getting that it's a tautology, but only ...
user avatar
  • 189
3 votes
2 answers
626 views

Step by step natural deduction: (T > E) ^ (A > L) /... (T v A) > (E v L)

I'm having trouble proving the following using natural deduction: (T > E) ^ (A > L) /... (T v A) > (E v L) I checked the answer but I didn't quite understanding the reason why the proof progressed ...
user avatar
3 votes
2 answers
535 views

Implication Introduction formulated as a theorem?

While making a list of the rules of inference for my math students, I came across this list on Wikipedia: I noticed a pattern: for every introduction rule, there seems to be an elimination rule, and ...
user avatar
3 votes
2 answers
303 views

Can something proved by contradiction always be proved without a proof by contradiction?

Proof by contradictions work by assuming that something is true, and then using logic (along with other assumptions which you know are true) to show that that leads to a contradiction, thus proving ...
user avatar
  • 383
3 votes
4 answers
589 views

Symbolic Logic - Negation Introduction

I am working on a problem for an online class that I'm struggling to figure out. I'm given these premises: 1. (H > (A > B)) (The > sign here represents conditional) 2. (~K & ~B) 3. (~A > K) The ...
user avatar
3 votes
3 answers
2k views

Prove A ∨ D from A ∨ (B ∧ C) and (¬ B ∨ ¬ C) ∨ D ( LPL Q6.26) without using --> or material implication

This is a repeated question: Language Logic and Proof Q. 6.26 Using the natural deduction rules, give a formal proof of A ∨ D from the premises A ∨ (B ∧ C) (¬ B ∨ ¬ C) ∨ D ...
user avatar
  • 131
3 votes
3 answers
1k views

2 simple Formal Fitch Proofs

I'm having difficulty proving these. They seem obvious, but I can't figure how to set up formal proofs for them. Could anyone give me clues on how to start them? ¬(P∧¬Q) from the premise P→Q; ¬Q→(R→P)...
user avatar
  • 127

1
2 3 4 5 6