Scribd
Upload
48 views9 pages

Preliminary 2-Arguments

This document discusses logical reasoning and arguments. It introduces symbolic logic and defines an argument as a collection of propositions where one proposition follows from others. There are three ways to validate an argument: using truth tables, shortened truth tables, and Venn diagrams. Truth tables determine if an argument is valid by checking if its propositional form is a tautology. Shortened truth tables only require finding one combination of propositional variables that makes the form false. Venn diagrams translate statements to sets to show the relationships between the propositions graphically. An example of each validation method is provided.

Uploaded by

Rye Felimon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
48 views9 pages

Preliminary 2-Arguments

This document discusses logical reasoning and arguments. It introduces symbolic logic and defines an argument as a collection of propositions where one proposition follows from others. There are three ways to validate an argument: using truth tables, shortened truth tables, and Venn diagrams. Truth tables determine if an argument is valid by checking if its propositional form is a tautology. Shortened truth tables only require finding one combination of propositional variables that makes the form false. Venn diagrams translate statements to sets to show the relationships between the propositions graphically. An example of each validation method is provided.

Uploaded by

Rye Felimon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

Presentor

Edwin D. Ibańez, Ph.D.


Professor, Dept. of Math
& Physics

Preliminaries: Logical Reasoning


ARGUMENTS

Prepared by:
Edwin D. Ibanez, Ph.D.
P:rofessor, Math & Physics Dept.
Introduction
Symbolic logic is mainly a study of arguments; and
since argument is made up of propositions, there is a need
to determine the truthfulness or falsity of these propositions
in order to know the validity or invalidity of an argument.
Arguments
An argument is a collection of propositions where it
is claimed that one of the propositions called conclusion
follows from the other propositions called the premises of
the argument and is denoted by P1, P2, …, Pn / Q

Three ways of validating an argument:


1. by using truth table;
2. by using shortened truth table; and
3. by using diagram.
Truth Table
Theorem: The argument P1, P2, …, Pn / Q is valid if and
only if the proposition (P1  P2 . . .  Pn)  Q is a
tautology.
Example:
If a man is a bachelor , he is unhappy.
If a man is unhappy, he dies young.
So, bachelor dies young.

Letting p be the statement “He is a bachelor.”, q is “He is


unhappy.”, and r is “He dies young.” Thus, the given
argument in symbol can be written as
[(pq)(qr)]  (pr)
and can be verified by the following truth table.
Let: P1 = (pq), P2 = (qr), P3 = (pr),
P4 = (pq)(qr) P5 = [(pq)(qr)]  (pr)

p q r P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F T
T F T F T T F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T T T T T T
F T F T F T F T
F F T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T
Shortened Truth Table

 The invalidity of an argument may be verified by


showing that its propositional form is not a tautology.
 Since the propositional form of an argument is an
implication, then we should be able to show an instance
when the premise is true but the conclusion is false.
 We do not have to construct the whole truth table for the
propositional form to do this. All we have to do is to
determine the combination of values that makes the
propositional form of the argument false.
 This simplified process of constructing a truth table is
called shortened truth table method.
Example:
Prove the invalidity of the argument
pq
rs
qr
p  s
The propositional form of this argument is

[(p  q)(r  s)(q  r)]  (p  s)

This is false when the propositional variables have the


following truth values:
p q r s
F T F F
Venn Diagram

Many verbal statements can be translated into


equivalent statements using sets, which can then be described
by Venn diagrams. Hence Venn diagram is one of the ways to
determine the validity of an argument.

Example: Consider this argument


Babies are irrational.
Nobody is despised who can manage a crocodile.
Irrational people are despised.
------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, babies cannot manage a crocodile.
Consider the given example.
 By first premise, the set of babies is a subset of irrational
people.

 By third premise, the set of irrational people is contained in


the set of despised people.

 By second premise, the set of despised people and the set of


people who can manage crocodile are disjoint. Note that the
set of babies and the set of people who can manage
crocodiles are disjoint.

 In other words, “Babies cannot manage crocodiles” is a


consequence of the first, second, and third premises, and
represent a valid argument.

You might also like