Scribd
Upload
42 views

Tutorial 1

This document contains examples and exercises on propositional logic from a tutorial on the topic. It includes truth tables to evaluate propositions with multiple connectives. Translations are provided to express propositions in English rather than symbols. Validity of inferences is determined by analyzing truth values or using rules of inference like modus ponens. Exercises are included to complete proofs, symbolize language, and determine if inferences are valid or contain fallacies.

Uploaded by

RITIK KAUSHIK
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
42 views

Tutorial 1

This document contains examples and exercises on propositional logic from a tutorial on the topic. It includes truth tables to evaluate propositions with multiple connectives. Translations are provided to express propositions in English rather than symbols. Validity of inferences is determined by analyzing truth values or using rules of inference like modus ponens. Exercises are included to complete proofs, symbolize language, and determine if inferences are valid or contain fallacies.

Uploaded by

RITIK KAUSHIK
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 24

BITS Pilani

Pilani Campus

MATH F213
Tutorial
Propositional Logic
Ex (p. 43, 1(c)
Construct the truth table for
𝑝 ∧ 𝑞 ∨ ~𝑝 ∧ 𝑟 ∨ 𝑞 ∧ 𝑟 .
p q r 𝑝∧𝑞 ~𝑝 ∧ 𝑟 ሼ 𝑝∧𝑞 𝑞∧𝑟 Final
proposition
T T T T F T T T
T T F T F T F T
T F T F F F F F
T F F F F F F F
F T T F T T T T
F T F F F F F F
F F T F T T F T
F F F F F F F F

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex (P. 43, 2(d))

Prove the following proposition is a tautology :


𝑝 → 𝑞 ∨ 𝑟 ∧ ~𝑞 → 𝑝 → 𝑟 .

(Abbreviated truth table method)


The last connective is →. If the proposition is F, then premise
is T and consequent is F.
Consequent 𝑝 → 𝑟 is F, so 𝑝 is T and 𝑟 is F.
Premise 𝑝 → 𝑞 ∨ 𝑟 ∧ ~𝑞 is T, so 𝑞 is F.
Since 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑟 have truth values (𝑇, 𝐹, 𝐹), 𝑞 ∨ 𝑟 is F.
But 𝑝 is T, hence the premise is F.
This implies, even in this case, proposition is T.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex 4(e), p 44

Let p : David is playing pool, q : David is inside,


r : David is doing his homework, s : David is listening to
music.
Translate the following proposition in acceptable English.
~𝑝 ∧ 𝑞 ∨ ~𝑟 ∧ 𝑠 .

Solution : David is not playing pool and David is inside, or,


David is not doing his homework and David is listening to
music.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


p. 44

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


EX.

Prove that the following implications are tautologies :

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Exercise 1

BITS Pilani, Deemed to be University under Section 3 of UGC Act, 1956


Exercise 2:

Solution is left as an exercise.

BITS Pilani, Deemed to be University under Section 3 of UGC Act, 1956


EX 5 p 55

Complete the blanks so that the set is in conformity with the


rule of detachment.
(a) --------
(b) 1984 is a leap year
(c) Hence 1984 is a presidential election year.

The rule of detachment modus pones is


𝑝→𝑞
𝑝
−−−−−− −
∴𝑞
Blank is replaced by
‘If 1984 is a leap year then 1984 is a presidential year’.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex II P. 55

Complete the blanks in the following sets of propositions so


that each set is in conformity with the transitive rule :
2. (a) If x is greater than y then u is less than v.
(b) If u is less than v then z is greater than w.
(c) Hence --------.

Solution : If x is greater than y then z is greater than w.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex III p55
Determine if the inference is valid or faulty. If valid, produce
some evidence which will confirm the validity. If faulty, find a
combination of truth values that will confirm a fallacy, or
indicate a fallacy.
4. If angle  = angle , then the lines AB and BC are equal.
We know AB = BC.
Hence angle  = angle .
Let 𝑝 ∶ angle  = angle , 𝑞 ∶ AB = BC
The inference is
𝑝→𝑞
𝑞
−−−−− −
∴𝑝
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
The inference is faulty, as (𝑝, 𝑞) having truth values (F, T)
makes all premises T but consequence F.

This is the fallacy of affirming the consequent.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex III p 55
Determine if the inference is valid or faulty. If valid, produce
some evidence which will confirm the validity. If faulty, find
a combination of truth values that will confirm a fallacy, or
indicate a fallacy.
12. Either Mack is not guilty or Mike is telling the truth.
Mike is not telling the truth.
Hence, Mack is not guilty.
Solution : Let p : Mack is guilty, q : Mike is telling the truth.
The symbolic version of the inference is :
~𝑝 ∨ 𝑞
~𝑞
−−−−−− −
∴ ~𝑝
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
Inference is valid as premise ~𝑞 is T, hence 𝑞 is F.
Premise ~𝑝 ∨ 𝑞 is T, hence, as 𝑞 is F, ~𝑝 is T.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex III p 55

Determine if the inference is valid or faulty. If valid, produce


some evidence which will confirm the validity. If faulty,
find a combination of truth values that will confirm a
fallacy, or indicate a fallacy.
14. The governor will call a special session only if the
senate can not reach a compromise.
If a majority of the Cabinet are in agreement, then the
governor will call a special session.
The senate can not reach a compromise.
Hence a majority of the Cabinet are in agreement.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Solution

Let 𝑝 : The governor will call a special session,


𝑞 : The senate can not reach a compromise,
𝑟 : A majority of the Cabinet are in agreement.
The given inference can symbolically be written as

𝑝→𝑞 The inference is faulty as


𝑟→𝑝 the truth values (T, T, F)
𝑞 of (𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑟) make all the
------------- premises T but conclusion
∴𝑟 F.
How did you find it?
Any other combination?
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
Ex III p. 55

16. The governor will call a special session only if the


senate can not reach a compromise.
If a majority of the Cabinet are in agreement, then the
governor will call a special session.
The senate can reach a compromise.
Hence a majority of the Cabinet are not in agreement

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


solution

Let 𝑝 : The governor will call a special session,


𝑞 : The senate can not reach a compromise,
𝑟 : A majority of the Cabinet are in agreement.
The given inference can symbolically be written as

𝑝→𝑞
𝑟→𝑝
~𝑞
-------------
∴ ~𝑟

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Cont.

Using the law of contrapositives, the inference can be


rewritten as :

~𝑞 → ~𝑝 (1) Using transitive rule to 1 , 2 , we get


(~𝑝) → ~𝑟 (2) (~𝑞) → ~𝑟
~𝑞
~𝑞 (3) −−−−−−− −
−−−−−−− − ∴ ~𝑟
∴ ~𝑟

The validity of the argument follows by modus pones.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex V(6) p 58

Determine if the inference pattern is valid or invalid. If


invalid, indicate a combination of truth values which will
produce a counterexample. If valid, produce an evidence
to confirm validity.

~𝑡 → ~𝑟 𝑟 ∨ 𝑠 ≡ ((~𝑟) → 𝑠).
~𝑠 By transitive rule we get
𝑡→𝑤 ~𝑡 → 𝑠.
𝑟∨𝑠 This and ~𝑠 give 𝑡,
--------------------- by modus tollens
∴𝑤 𝑡 and 𝑡 → 𝑤 give 𝑤,
By modus pones.
Thus the inference is valid.
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
Ex VI p. 59

Verify the following argument is valid by translating into


symbols and using truth tables to check tautology.
If Joe is a mathematician, then he is ambitious.
If Joe is an early riser, then he does not like oatmeal.
If Joe is ambitious, then he is an early riser.
Hence if Joe is a mathematician, then he does not like
oatmeal.
Let p : Joe is a mathematician, q : Joe is ambitious,
r : Joe is an early riser, s: Joe does not like oatmeal.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Cont..

Symbolic version of the inference is

𝑝→𝑞
𝑟→𝑠
𝑞→𝑟
---------------
∴ 𝑝 → 𝑠.

Truth table will have 24 = 16 rows and 9 columns.


Verify last one contains T only.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Abbreviated truth table
method
If conclusion is F, then p is T and s is F.
As the premise 𝑟 → 𝑠 is T, r is F.
As the premise 𝑞 → 𝑟 is T, q is F.
But p is T and q is F implies the premise 𝑝 → 𝑞 is F.
This can’t be so. Hence conclusion is T if all premises are
T.
Thus the argument is valid.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus


Ex. V (2).
rs
pq
Use
rp
(rp)((~p) r)
-----------------------
(s  q) ((~q) s)
sq

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

You might also like