Logic and a Notation

for Simple Proposition

By:
Fakhri Rizaldi (2302180002)
Mukhamad Mirza (2303180008)
01
Logic
 Preview

1.1 What is Logic? 1.5 Avoiding Ambiguity using Notation

Relation between Logic and Rational

1.2 Behaviour 1.6 Rules of Calculations

1.3 Arithmetical Fact & Logic 1.7 Valid and Invalid Logic

1.4 Logical Connectives 1.8 Modus Ponens

1.1. Definition
Logic is a word that means many things to
different people. Many everyday uses of
the words logic and logical could be
replaced by expressions such as
reasonable behaviour and reasonable.
 Understanding the Scope of Logic

Logic

LOGIC deals with Notes

meanings in a The terms ‘logic’ and Logic deals most
language system, ‘logical’ do not apply centrally with
not with actual directly to UTTERANCES PROPOSITIONS
(which are instances of
behaviour of any behaviour).
sort
 Examples (based on the notes):

Example 1 Example 2
Harry is so illogical: first he says he doesn’t The truth of the proposition that Socrates
want to come, and then he changes his is mortal follows logically from the fact
mind. that Socrates is a man and the fact that all
men are mortal.

Yes / No Yes / No
1.2. Relation between Rational Behaviour and Logic

There is an important connection between logic (even in our narrow sense) and
rational action, but it is wrong to equate the two.

Logic is just one contributing factor in rational behaviour.

 Rational Behaviour

Assumptions and
Goal Calculations
knowledge
 Rational Action:
Eating cheese

Goal Assumption and Calculations

knowledge

• If hunger is alleviated by eating

food and cheese is food, then
hunger is alleviated by eating
Hunger is alleviated by cheese.
• If hunger is alleviated by eating
eating food. Cheese is cheese, then my own hunger
food. There is a piece of would be alleviated by eating
To alleviate my hunger
cheese in front of me. I am this piece of cheese in front of
me, and
able to eat this piece of • Eating this piece of cheese
cheese. would alleviate my hunger, and
my goal is to alleviate my hunger,
so therefore eating this piece of
cheese would achieve my goal.
So? What’s the relation between logic and rational behaviour?

Based on the previous example, the use

of the word logic here restricts the logic
to the ‘calculations’ aspect of this
behaviour. The goals, assumptions,
knowledge, and final action are in no way
logical or illogical, in our sense.
The key difference between logic and rational
behavior is that logic is a formal system that
focuses on the validity and structure of
reasoning, often detached from individual
preferences or goals, while rational behavior
takes into account personal preferences, goals,
and utility in decision-making.
 Yes/no?
If the word cheese in the above example were replaced throughout by
Yes/no the word chalk, would the calculations lead to the conclusion that I should
eat a piece of chalk?

Regardless of whether you think eating a piece of chalk in these

Yes/no circumstances would be rational or not, would there be anything illogical
(in the narrow sense) in the conclusion that I should eat a piece of chalk?

L/I/N Is the statement that chalk is food in itself logical (L), illogical (I), or
neither (N), according to the semanticist’s use of these terms?

L/I/N Is it logical, illogical, or neither to wish to alleviate one’s hunger?

Say I were to calculate thus: If hunger is alleviated by eating cheese and

Yes/no cheese is food, then hunger is not alleviated by eating cheese. Would
you say that this calculation is illogical?
1.3. Arithmetical Fact & Logic

There is a close analogy between logic and arithmetic (which is why we use the word
calculation). ‘Arithmetical fact’ does not mean just fact involving numbers in some way, but
rather fact arising from the system of rules defining addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division. Both arithmetic and logic also have similar aspects namely a notation and a set of
rules. Another similarity between arithmetic and logic is the unthinkability of alternatives.

Example:
• 2+2=5 is unthinkable because it doesn’t follow the rules of + = as it
contradicts with the rules of equation. That is why it is called
arithmetical contradiction.
• All men are mortal and some men are not mortal is unthinkable in the
same way. This is a logical contradiction.
 Contradiction/Analytic?

C/A John is here and John is not here

C/A Either John is here or John is not here

C/A If John is here, John is here

C/A If everyone is here, no one isn’t here

C/A If someone is here, then no one is here

 1.4. Logical Connectives
What is it?
Logical connectives are words or What are they?
symbols used to combine or
modify the meaning of • AND (Conjunction): it combines two propositions and is true only when both of
propositions (statements) in logic. them are true.

They are essential for • OR (Disjunction): it combines two propositions and is true if at least one of them is
true.
constructing complex logical
expressions and evaluating their • NOT (Negation): it negates a proposition, turning a true statement into false and
truth values. vice versa.

Words such as and, or, if, and not • IF-THEN (Implication): it expresses a conditional relationship, where the second
are not predicates and cannot be proposition follows from the first. It is false only if the first proposition is true, but
used as referring expressions. the second is false.
Logic calls such words connectives.
• IF AND ONLY IF (Biconditional): it asserts that two propositions are equivalent and
The main purpose of the have the same truth value. It is true if both propositions have the same truth value,
connectives and and or is to whether both are true or both are false.
‘connect’ individual propositions
with other propositions.
 Examples:

01 "The picnic will happen if it is sunny today, and it is warm today."

02 "We'll play outside tomorrow if it either rains or snows."

03 "I'm sorry, but the cat is not black; it has a different color."

04 "If it is raining, then the ground gets wet."

05 "You can enter the event if and only if you have a valid ticket."
1.5. Avoiding Ambiguity using Notation

The initial difficulty in talking about propositions is that we need to invent a way of representing
them unambiguously. One needs a notation that will provide, for example, two clearly different
representations for the two different meanings of a two-ways ambiguous sentence, and three
different representations in the case of a three-ways ambiguous sentence, and so on.

Example:
• John and Mary are married is ambiguous, being paraphrasable either as: John and
Mary are married to each other or as John is married to someone and Mary is married
to someone.
• In logical notation, the first interpretation (proposition) here could be represented by
the formula: (j MARRIED TO m) & (m MARRIED TO j) and the second interpretation
would be represented by the formula:( (j MARRIED TO x)) & ( (m MARRIED TO y))
 1.6. Rules of Calculations

Similar to what we have talked about previously, rules of calculations in the

semantic meaning involve principles and processes for determining how
language expressions combine and convey meaning, ensuring clarity and
coherence in communication.

In order to state rules of calculation, or ‘rules of inference’, completely

systematically, these rules have to work on representations of the logical form
of sentences, rather than on the grammatical forms of the sentences
themselves.
Examples:
01 02

Does the truth of the third sentence

Does the truth of the third sentence
below follow necessarily from the truth
below follow necessarily from the truth
of the first two?
of the first two?
• A plant suddenly fell off the
• A plant normally gives off oxygen
window-sill
• A geranium is a plant therefore
• A geranium is a plant therefore
• A geranium normally gives off
• A geranium suddenly fell off the
oxygen
window-sill
Yes / No
Yes / No
 1.7. Valid and Invalid Logic
Applying the rules of calculations, the conclusion of arguments can be
valid or invalid based on the logic.

1) If John bought that house, he must have got a loan from the bank. He did buy that house,
so therefore he did get a loan from the bank.
2) If John bought that house, he must have got a loan from the bank. He did buy the house,
so therefore he didn’t get a loan from the bank.
3) If John bought that house, he must have got a loan from the bank. He didn’t get a loan from
the bank, so therefore he didn’t buy that house.
4) If John bought that house, he must have got a loan from the bank. He didn’t buy that
house, so therefore he must not have got a loan from the bank.
5) John is a Scot, and all Scots are drunkards, so John is a drunkard.
6) No one is answering the phone at Gary’s house, so he must be at home, because whenever
Gary’s at home, he never answers the phone.

Which are valid and which are invalid?

1.8. Modus Ponens
MODUS PONENS is a rule stating that if a proposition
P entails a proposition Q, and P is true, then Q is
true. Put in the form of a diagram, Modus Ponens
looks like this:
Examples of calculations that follow/doesn‘t follow modus ponens:

If it rains (P), then I will bring an umbrella (Q). It is raining (P=true),

Follow
so I bring an umbrella (Q=true).

If it rains (P), then I will bring an umbrella (Q), It is raining (P=true),

Doesn‘t Follow
so I don’t bring an umbrella (Q=not true)
 Which sentences follow the rule of Modus Ponens?

If it doesn’t rain, Jimmy will go to your

1. If it is Sunday, then we will go on a trip. It
is Sunday, so we go on a trip. 4. house. It doesn’t rain, so Jimmy doesn’t go
to your house

2. If it is Sunday, then we will go on a trip. It

is Sunday, so we stay at home. 5. If you drop the vase, it will break. It
doesn’t break, so you dropped the vase.

If her old phone breaks, she will buy a new

3. phone. Her old phone breaks, so she
doesn’t buy a new phone
6. If you heat water, it will boil. You heat the
water, so it doesn’t boil.
 Unit 13
A NOTATION FOR SIMPLE
PROPOSITIONS
Review
01 02
Proposition Referring Expresion
Unit 2 Unit 4

03 04
Predicate Predicator
Unit 5 Unit 5
Review
01 02
Proposition Referring Expresion
A PROPOSITION is that part of the A REFERRING EXPRESSION is any
meaning of the utterance of a expression used in an utterance to refer
declarative sentence which describes to something or someone (or a clearly
some state of affairs. delimited collection of things or
people), i.e. used with a particular
referent in mind.

03 04
Predicate Predicator
The term ‘predicate’ identifies elements The term ‘predicator’ identifies the
in the language system, independently semantic role played by a particular
of particular example sentences. Thus, it word (or group of words) in a particular
would make sense to envisage a list of sentence. In this way, it is similar to the
the predicates of English, as included, grammatical term ‘subject’
say, in a dictionary.
Practice
 Introduction
• Logic provides a notation for unambiguously representing the essentials of
propositions. Logic has in fact been extremely selective in the parts of
language it has dealt with; but the parts it has dealt with it has treated in
great depth.

• We assume that simple propositions, like simple sentences, have just one
predicator (recall Unit 5), which we write in CAPITAL LETTERS.

• The arguments of the predicator we represent by single lower-case letters.

Abraham died would be represented by the formula

a DIE
Argument Predicator
 Example
f DOG
1. Fido is a dog.
t LOVE
2. Ted loves Alice.
p INTRODUCE m j
3. Phil introduced Mary to Jack.

These formulae are very bare, stripped down to nothing but names and predicators. The reasons for
eliminating elements such as forms of the verb be, articles (a, the), tense markers (past, present), and
certain prepositions (e.g. to in Phil introduced Mary to Jack) are partly a matter of serious principle and
partly a matter of convenience.
 Omitted or Not?

Some prepositions contribute SUBSTANTIALLY to the sense of the sentence.

Sidney put his hat ON the table,

whereas in other cases, prepositions seem merely to be required by the

grammar of the language when certain verbs and adjectives are used.

present someone WITH something, or

be envious OF someone.
 Practice
w NEPHEW r
s CRAZY b

e ENVIOUS j

m LOOK-FOR b

m LOOK-AT b

w BESIDE h
In effect, we treat expressions like look for, look at, look after as single predicates when
they contain prepositions that contribute in an important way to the sense of the sentence.
 TENSE (e.g. past, resent)
Tense (e.g. past, present) is NOT represented in our logical formulae, and neither is any
form of the verb be. We also omit the word than in comparative sentences.

The omission of tense is actually not justifiable on the grounds that tense does not
contribute to the sense of a sentence, as shown below.
 TENSE (e.g. past, resent)
● We omit any indication of tense from our logical formulae here for the
quite arbitrary reason that a logic for tenses has only recently been
developed, and it involves a number of complications which would be out
of place in an elementary text such as this.
● In a full logical theory, tenses (and any other indications of time) must be
dealt with.
● Now, given that we are not representing tense in any way in our logical
formulae, is there any need to include anything corresponding to the
various forms of the verb be found in simple English sentences?
 Review
Verb be, Equative and non-equative sentences (Unit 4)
 Review
Verb be, Equative and non-equative sentences (Unit 4)
 Verb be (Identity)
● Besides its use as a ‘carrier’ of tense, the verb be sometimes expresses the identity predicate (i.e. the
predicate relating the referents of two referring expressions in an equative sentence), and
● sometimes makes no contribution to the sense of a sentence at all that is relevant for determining the
truth value of the proposition expressed by the sentence.
● In our logical formulae, we will represent the identity predicate with an ‘equals’ sign , and we will simply
omit anything corresponding to any other use of the verb be.
 Practice
jr dc

dj GENTLEMAN
mh VILLAIN
Dj = mh
jr = dc
mc SISTER ck
 Simple Proposition
• Logical formulae for simple propositions are very simple in
structure. It is important to adhere to this simple structure, as it
embodies a strict definition of the structure of simple
propositions.
• Every SIMPLE proposition is representable by a single
PREDICATOR, drawn from the predicates in the language, and a
number of ARGUMENTS, drawn from the names in the language.
• This implies, among other things, that no formula for a simple
proposition can have TWO (or more) predicators, and it cannot
have anything which is neither a predicate nor a name.
Simple Proposition
Practice
 Logical Notation
● Logical notation has been designed to be perspicuous*. Not only are
logical formulae unambiguous, but also the structure of each formula
reflects, in a direct and unconfused way, the type of situation in the
world that it describes.
● The idea behind logical notation is that each different type of
situation in the real world should be described by a different type of
formula.
● Natural languages, such as English and Chinese, often use sentences
of the same grammatical type to describe quite different situations.
*clear and easy to understand.
 Generic and Non-generic Sentence
Logical notation provides one type of formula (which we shall not meet here) for generic
sentences, and a different type of formula for non-generic sentences. One can see from the
formula itself what type of meaning it has. One does not need to appeal to the context, as
one often does in interpreting a sentence in a natural language.

Grammatical Structure:
Subject – Verb – Object
 Rule
A simple formula consisting of a name and a one-place predicate is true
of a situation in which the referent of the name is a member of the
extension of the predicate.
Practice
Practice
 CONCLUSION
• We have presented a logical notation for simple propositions. A well-
formed formula for a simple proposition contains a single predicator,
drawn from the predicates in the language, and a number of
arguments, drawn from the names in the language.
• The notation we have given contains no elements corresponding to
articles such as a and the, certain prepositions, and certain instances of
the verb be, as these make no contribution to the truth conditions of
the sentences containing them.
• We have also, for convenience only, omitted any representation of
tense in our logical formulae.
 CONCLUSION
The introduction of a notation for propositions fills a gap left empty since
Unit 2, where we introduced a way of representing sentences and utterances,
but not propositions.
We now have (the beginnings of) a way of representing items at all three
levels:
 Thank You
Do you have any
Questions?