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.
306
questions
-1
votes
1
answer
102
views
Help with proving: P, ¬(Q ∧ P) ⊢ ¬Q
Here's the issue, there's no usage of derived rules allowed. So no DeMorgan's Law. All that's allowed is the basic TFL elimination/introduction rules, IP, (e)X(plosion), and ⊥. I'm absolutely lost on ...
- 17
1
vote
0
answers
113
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
7
votes
2
answers
792
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 ...
- 183
5
votes
2
answers
196
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 ...
- 51
-1
votes
2
answers
427
views
Predicate logic proof solve
Provide a proof for the following using FOL in forallx
Use the natural deduction system and proof strategies in forallx to provide a formal proof for the following . Please provide a picture of your ...
- 1
5
votes
2
answers
733
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,...
- 63
1
vote
3
answers
154
views
How to prove, in modal logic, that □A→A is valid (T axiom) iff R is reflexive?
How to prove, in modal logic, that □A→A is valid (T axiom) iff R is reflexive? I'm not sure how to prove axiom in reverse?
0
votes
3
answers
624
views
How to show disjunction can be expressed as a conditional
How to show that formula "A ∨ B" can be constructed from A and B using only the conditional connective (→).
- 11
0
votes
0
answers
236
views
Proving validity/invalidity of a modal argument
□(A v B) → (□A v □B) ...(1)
This symbolic argument is intuitively invalid. In (1), if we replace B with ~A, then we see that though the antecedent is necessary, the consequent is a contradiction since ...
- 317
0
votes
1
answer
53
views
Natural Deduction flagging system (Virginia Klenk)
I am wondering if anyone can clarify a detail that's been bugging me. Here are the flagging restrictions for Virginia Klenk's natural deduction system:
RI. A letter being flagged must be new to the ...
- 488
3
votes
2
answers
269
views
Philosophers or philosophical traditions that reject symbolic reasoning
I'm most familiar with philosophy in the context of discussing various flavors of logic, such as independence-friendly logic, various extensions of first-order logic with plurals, relevant logic, and ...
- 1,044
0
votes
2
answers
126
views
Symbolization and Evaluation of Some Simple Sentences
Here are some sentences, and I want to know whether I'm thinking about them correctly:
(1) The tooth fairy is not real.
Symbolization: (-R)t
Truth Value: False
(2) It is not the case that the tooth ...
- 53
0
votes
5
answers
164
views
Can you give me some concrete example, so that I could understand these modal logic sentences
So there is these simple modal logic sentences:
□(a → b) and a → □b
Can anyone help me with some real-life examples, because I have troubles grasping the difference?
edit
The simpler question is this: ...
- 285
-1
votes
1
answer
105
views
Fitch proofs help?
I'm new to logic and can see how to write these out informally, but need some help seeing how they should be translated into formal proofs in Fitch.
- 1
3
votes
3
answers
349
views
How do we arrive at stronger theories in mathematics/logic?
A reasonable aim of formal mathematics/logic is to build systems which can "interpret" many things. As an example, ZFC can interpret a number of things. Incompleteness Theorems provide us ...
- 1,065
6
votes
3
answers
185
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 ...
- 223
0
votes
0
answers
42
views
How to represent "apart from" formally?
While working on an argument over the last few days, I came to a point where I needed to formally render an "even if" sentence. Here and here, I found some good options, but I'm not sure I ...
- 12.1k
0
votes
1
answer
55
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
vote
1
answer
72
views
Prove (-A=-A) = [-(-A => A) = (A=>-A)]
This is not homework
I do this for fun.
I tried using prover. The result is quite confusing.
I use the Logic Book
This is the last problem I want to do in this
section.
I have to it mostly in SD+ .
|- ...
- 164
-1
votes
2
answers
97
views
2
votes
3
answers
136
views
Prove the following theorem: Need hints to finish it
This is not homework. I do it for fun and learning.
I use the Logic Book.
Problem has to be done in SD+.
How to prove the following argument :
|- [~A =>(~B=>C)]=>[(A v B) v (~~B v C )]
I ...
- 164
0
votes
2
answers
66
views
How do I symbolise this statement with a definite description in first order logic?
"If there is exactly one present King of France, then the present King of France is a present King of France"
The part I am confused about is the consequent of the conditional which equals ...
7
votes
2
answers
488
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 ...
- 3,787
-2
votes
1
answer
79
views
Need help to convert the following semantic tableau to Fitch style proof
Derive ~M
1.~R & ~W.
2.[(R=W)v(Mv G)]=>(W=M).
As you see, the tableaux is valid.So l want to translate it
an SL derivation(Fitch style)
Here is my understanding
1 ~R. 1 => E
2 ~W. 1 =...
- 164
0
votes
1
answer
39
views
Need to check to if my SL is correct for following problem
This is not homework .
l do this for fun. I am 58.
I graduated Concordia University in 1993
Problem comes from the Logic Book by
Bergman pg 217 (17)c
I want to see if my SL is correct.
If civil ...
- 164
0
votes
2
answers
66
views
Need help to inconsistency problem
I am using theThe Logic Book)
I need help to find the inconsistencies.
using SD
1.(E V F)=>(G & -I)
2.(G V F)=>I
3 -F=> E
I tried everything to show it
I think showing -I and I might do ...
- 113
1
vote
0
answers
100
views
What is the smallest theory formulated in a given first-order language? [closed]
I received an exercise question in my meta-logic course, which asks:
"What is the smallest theory formulated in a given first-order language L? Provide an axiomatisation of this theory. What is ...
0
votes
2
answers
114
views
Logical fallacy in addition
Consider an example
A
A V ~B (addition)
B > A
It seems logically vaild .
Now assume A is being apple and B is banana .
So its equivalent
**It's Apple
It's apple or not banana
If it's Banana ...
- 101
2
votes
1
answer
75
views
In symbolic logic why (p->q) and (p->~q) don't contradict each other?
I am a beginner in symbolic logic and still mostly using intution to solve the problems. After spending some time trying to figure out why (p -> q) is true if p is false I've realized that this ...
- 123
0
votes
1
answer
42
views
Understanding [(a→b).(c→d)] formula in section 36 of The Logic of Scientific Discovery
Excerpt from footnote 1 in section 36 of Popper's "The Logic of Scientific Discovery":
In the present section, the arrow is used to express a conditional rather than the entailment relation....
- 173
2
votes
0
answers
82
views
What is 'expendable' in logic and how to explain 'tautology' given this image?
This image is from http://www.nfillion.com/index.php/teaching/9-logic-112. According to this, a proposition can have 4 basic properties: (1) necessarily, (2) not possibly, (3) missing, and (4) ...
- 317
0
votes
2
answers
238
views
Is the material implication the correct model of conditional reasoning in mathematics?
Question:
Do you believe that the material implication correctly models the kind of conditional reasoning necessary in mathematics to prove a theorem?
Example:
If x > y and y > 0, then x > ...
- 6,238
0
votes
2
answers
66
views
Is there a symbol for what a logic gate yields?
Is there a logic symbol for what output a logic gate yields?
For instance, for an AND gate:
A
B
A ^ B
T
T
T
T
F
F
F
T
F
F
F
F
I want to propagate A ^ B into output C, but I wouldn't want to use ...
- 187
0
votes
1
answer
166
views
an argument that is clearly valid but invalid in a sentence logic
I was reading these paper(dont really remember the title) it stated that there are simple arguments that are clearly valid but would be counted as invalid in the sentence logic system it was using. i ...
0
votes
4
answers
297
views
What relationship exists between logical and. material Implication (Conditional)? Can you please represent both conditionals in a truth table?
Can someone help me derive the truth table of the logical conditional from the material conditional?
Here are three statements about logical implication from my logic professor:
Given the argument: S:...
1
vote
0
answers
53
views
Is there a non-transitive frame in which schema 4 is true? Or an irreflexive frame in which schema T is true?
So, I know that I can construct a frame {W, R, I} which is not transitive and in which schema 4 is not true (more specifically, Axiom Schema K and Axiom Schema 4 are not both true). I also know that I ...
3
votes
2
answers
191
views
Formal versions of exotic logical connectives in natural language
Formal logic tends to be concerned with minimal or at least almost-minimal sets of logical connectives. The standard logical connectives are and, or, implies, iff, neg (I couldn't use Latex for their ...
- 251
-1
votes
2
answers
106
views
Prove that the following is a logical truth (tautology) using a natural deduction derivation: (B → C) ˅ (¬B → C) [closed]
Prove that the following is a logical truth (tautology) using a natural deduction derivation:
(B → C) ˅ (¬B → C)
How do I prove this using statement logic? I know I need to start with a supposition ...
5
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?
1
vote
2
answers
103
views
A thought experiment: will the following observations lead you to question Aristotle's syllogism?
Many philosophers think that logic are "inherently right" and cannot be refuted by empirical observations. Below is a thought experiment that questions this view.
Let's take Aristotle's ...
- 656
0
votes
1
answer
61
views
How do you express the following in symbolic logic?
If P is true, then Q is true. P being false or unknown says nothing about Q.
Instead of a truth table like this:
P : Q
0 : 0 = 1
0 : 1 = 1
1 : 0 = 0
1 : 1 = 1
You have a truth table like this:
P : Q
...
0
votes
2
answers
458
views
When can I discharge an assumption? or better put, When can I not discharge an assumption?
It's homework, so I won't give the example, but when is it legal for me to discharge an assumption? Basically, I'm introducing a conditional to prove a theorem that does not rest on any assumptions, ...
0
votes
0
answers
19
views
Tautology of p implies q and not p or q [duplicate]
I'm learning about tautologies right now. I see that a tautology is when two propositional statements have the same truth values. But I'm struggle with the truth table my professor provided about the ...
- 101
-3
votes
3
answers
287
views
How to reconcile the fact that mathematical proofs are logical implications with the lack of a formal calculus equivalent to the logical implication? [closed]
Theorems follow from axioms. That is, theorems are the logical consequence of axioms. Thus, mathematical proofs are essentially deductive. Proofs are all essentially logical implications. There is ...
- 6,238
0
votes
0
answers
106
views
how to translate the following sentence
Either it is not the case that Gonzolo play music and does not go to concert,or it is not the case that he does not read book and does not play football.
P:Gonzolo play music , Q: Gonzolo go to ...
0
votes
1
answer
287
views
if [if (if P then Q) then (if P then R)] then [if P then (if Q then R)]
i am new in logic course, i saw an question in my book. it says that show the following argument is valid by using natural derivation rules.
if [if (if P then Q) then (if P then R)] then [if P then (...
0
votes
0
answers
33
views
Truth function question
Is there a truth function connective for the phrase “after all”
I know “all” can be done in finite cases
I am using the Logic Book 4th ed
I am trying to find a paraphrase for it.
- 113
5
votes
1
answer
892
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), ...
user47471
4
votes
1
answer
168
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 ...
- 41
0
votes
1
answer
193
views
Equivalence Thesis
What is, if any, the canonical justification accepted in mathematical logic for the Equivalence Thesis, asserting (1) that indicative conditionals are truth-functional logical expressions and (2) that ...
- 6,238