COLLEGE OF NURSING

Lesson 7: Symbolic Logic

1. Conjunction ( ∧ ):
 The symbol for conjunction, often referred to as "and,"
represents the logical operation of combining two statements
where both must be true for the conjunction to be true.
 Example: If P represents the statement "It is raining," and Q
represents the statement "The ground is wet," then the
conjunction P∧Q represents "It is raining and the ground is wet."
2. Negation ( ¬ ):
 The symbol for negation, also known as "not," is used to
represent the logical operation of negating or denying a
statement.
 Example: If P represents the statement "It is raining," then the
negation ¬P represents "It is not raining" or "It is false that it is
raining."
3. Disjunction ( ∨ ):
 The symbol for disjunction, often referred to as "or," represents
the logical operation of combining two statements where at least
one must be true for the disjunction to be true.
 Example: If P represents the statement "It is raining," and Q
represents the statement "It is snowing," then the disjunction
P∨Q represents "It is raining or it is snowing."
Conditional statements and material implication
1. Conditional Statements:
 A conditional statement is a logical statement that asserts a
relationship between two propositions, typically in the form "if P,
then Q."
 In a conditional statement P→Q, P is called the antecedent or
hypothesis, and Q is called the consequent or conclusion.
 The conditional statement →P→Q asserts that if P is true, then Q
must also be true; however, if P is false, no claim is made about
the truth value of Q.
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
 Example: If P represents "It is raining," and Q represents "The
ground is wet," then the conditional statement P→Q can be
interpreted as "If it is raining, then the ground is wet."
2. Material Implication:
 Material implication is a logical operation that defines the truth-
functional relationship between the antecedent and consequent
of a conditional statement.
 According to material implication, a conditional statement P→Q is
false only when the antecedent P is true and the consequent Q is
false; otherwise, it is true.
 Material implication captures the truth-functional aspect of
conditionals and is used extensively in symbolic logic to express
logical relationships.
Argument Forms and Refutation by Logical Analogy
Argument forms and refutation by logical analogy are important concepts
in the study of logic, particularly in analyzing deductive arguments. Here's an
overview of each:
1. Argument Forms:
 Argument forms refer to the general structure or pattern of
deductive arguments. They outline the logical relationships
between premises and conclusions, regardless of the specific
content of the propositions involved.
 Common argument forms include modus ponens, modus tollens,
hypothetical syllogism, disjunctive syllogism, and others.
 Understanding argument forms allows for the recognition of valid
deductive reasoning patterns, which is essential for evaluating
the validity of arguments.
2. Refutation by Logical Analogy:
 Refutation by logical analogy is a method used to demonstrate
the invalidity of an argument by comparing its form to a known
invalid argument form.
 In this method, if an argument has the same form as a known
invalid argument, it can be refuted by analogy, even if its
premises are true.
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
 For example, if an argument follows the form of affirming the
consequent (a known invalid argument form), it can be refuted
by demonstrating the invalidity of the affirming the consequent
pattern, regardless of the truth or falsity of its premises.
 Refutation by logical analogy is a powerful tool for identifying
flawed reasoning and invalid argument structures.
Precise Meaning of "Valid" and "Invalid"
In logic, particularly in deductive reasoning, the terms "valid" and "invalid"
are used to evaluate the logical structure of arguments. Here's a precise
meaning of each:
1. Valid:
 An argument is considered valid if its conclusion logically follows
from its premises. In other words, the conclusion must be true
whenever the premises are true.
 Validity is concerned with the logical relationship between the
premises and the conclusion, rather than the actual truth of the
premises or conclusion.
 Even if the premises of a valid argument are false, the conclusion
must still be true if the argument is valid.
 Validity can be thought of as a measure of the argument's form
or structure. If the argument follows a valid logical pattern, it is
considered valid.
2. Invalid:
 An argument is considered invalid if its conclusion does not
logically follow from its premises. In other words, there is at least
one way for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false.
 Invalidity indicates a flaw in the logical structure of the
argument, such that even if the premises are true, the conclusion
may still be false.
 An invalid argument does not necessarily mean that the
conclusion is false; it simply means that the conclusion does not
necessarily follow from the premises.
 Invalidity can arise from logical fallacies, errors in reasoning, or
incorrect argument forms.
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
Testing Argument Validity on Truth Tables
Testing argument validity on truth tables is a method used in symbolic logic
to determine whether an argument is logically valid. Here's how it works:
1. Constructing Truth Tables:
 A truth table is a systematic way to enumerate all possible truth
values for the propositions (or variables) involved in an
argument.
 Each row of the truth table represents a different combination of
truth values for the propositions, starting from all propositions
being true (T) to all propositions being false (F).
2. Assigning Truth Values:
 Assign truth values (T or F) to each proposition in the argument,
considering all possible combinations of truth values.
 Include columns for each premise and the conclusion of the
argument.
3. Evaluating the Argument:
 Calculate the truth value of each premise and the conclusion
based on the assigned truth values for the propositions.
 Check whether the conclusion is true whenever all premises are
true in each row of the truth table.
4. Determining Validity:
 If the conclusion is true in every row where all premises are true,
the argument is considered valid.
 If there is at least one row where all premises are true but the
conclusion is false, the argument is invalid.
5. Example:
 Suppose we have the argument:
 Premise 1: P∧Q
 Premise 2: Q→R
 Conclusion: P→R
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
 Construct a truth table with columns for P, Q, R, Premise 1,
Premise 2, and Conclusion.
 Assign truth values to P, Q, and R (T and F) and calculate the
truth values for Premise 1, Premise 2, and Conclusion based on
the given propositions.
 Check if the Conclusion is true whenever both premises are true
in each row of the truth table.
 If the Conclusion is true in every row where both premises are
true, the argument is valid; otherwise, it is invalid.
Some Common Argument Form
Common argument forms in logic represent patterns of reasoning that
frequently appear in deductive arguments. Here are some of the most
common ones:
1. Modus Ponens (Affirming the Antecedent):
 If P→Q is true and P is true, then Q must be true.
 Example: If it is raining (P implies Q: If it is raining, then the
ground is wet) and it is indeed raining (P: It is raining), then the
ground is wet (Q: The ground is wet).
2. Modus Tollens (Denying the Consequent):
 If P→Q is true and Q is false, then P must be false.
 Example: If it is raining (P implies Q: If it is raining, then the
ground is wet) and the ground is not wet (¬Q: The ground is not
wet), then it is not raining (¬P: It is not raining).
3. Hypothetical Syllogism:
 If P→Q and Q→R are true, then P→R must also be true.
 Example: If it is raining (P implies Q: If it is raining, then the
ground is wet) and if the ground is wet (Q implies R: If the ground
is wet, then the grass will grow), then it is raining, the grass will
grow (P implies R: If it is raining, then the grass will grow).
4. Disjunctive Syllogism:
 If P∨Q is true and one of the disjuncts is false, then the other
must be true.
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
 Example: Either it is raining or it is snowing (P or Q: It is raining
or it is snowing). If it is not raining (¬P: It is not raining), then it
must be snowing (Q: It is snowing).
5. Constructive Dilemma:
 If (P→Q)∧(R→S) are true and either P or R is true, then either Q or
S must be true.
 Example: If it is raining, then the ground is wet (P implies Q: If it
is raining, then the ground is wet) and if it is sunny, then the
flowers bloom (R implies S: If it is sunny, then the flowers bloom).
If it is raining (P: It is raining) or it is sunny (R: It is sunny), then
either the ground is wet or the flowers bloom (Q or S: The ground
is wet or the flowers bloom).
Statement Forms and Material Equivalence
In logic, statement forms and material equivalence are essential
concepts for understanding logical relationships between propositions. Let's
explore each of them:
1. Statement Forms:
 A statement form is a template or pattern that represents a class
of statements or propositions with variables instead of specific
propositions.
 Statement forms abstract away from the content of propositions,
focusing solely on their logical structure or form.
 Example: The statement form "P ∧ Q" represents the conjunction

specific propositions. For instance, "It is raining ∧ It is windy" is

of two propositions, where "P" and "Q" can be replaced by any

an instantiation of the statement form "P ∧ Q."

2. Material Equivalence:
 Material equivalence is a logical relationship between two
propositions, indicating that they have the same truth value in all
possible scenarios.
 Two propositions P and Q are materially equivalent if they have
the same truth values in all rows of their truth tables.
 Material equivalence is denoted by the symbol "⇔" (double
arrow) and is read as "if and only if" or "is equivalent to."
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
 Example: Propositions P and Q are materially equivalent if the
truth table for P is identical to the truth table for Q. For instance,
"It is raining" and "The ground is wet" are materially equivalent if
they are always true or always false together, meaning that
whenever one is true, the other is true, and whenever one is
false, the other is false.
3. Example:
 Consider the statement forms "P → Q" (if P, then Q) and "¬Q →
¬P" (if not Q, then not P).
 These statement forms are materially equivalent, meaning they
have the same truth values in all possible scenarios.
 This equivalence is known as the contrapositive property, which
states that a conditional statement and its contrapositive have
the same truth value.
 Example: If "If it is raining, then the ground is wet" is true, then
"If the ground is not wet, then it is not raining" is also true, and
vice versa.
Understanding statement forms and material equivalence is crucial for
analyzing logical relationships between propositions and constructing valid
arguments in logic. These concepts provide tools for abstracting away from
specific content and focusing on the logical structure of propositions.
Three Laws of Thought
1. Law of Identity:
 This law states that each thing is identical with itself. In other
words, if a statement is true, then it is true. Symbolically, it can
be expressed as A=A.
 Example: "The sky is blue" is identical with itself, so the
statement "The sky is blue" is true.
2. Law of Non-Contradiction:
 This law states that contradictory statements cannot both be
true at the same time and in the same sense. Symbolically, it can
be expressed as ¬(A∧¬A).
 Example: "The sky is blue" and "The sky is not blue" cannot both
be true at the same time and in the same sense.
 COLLEGE OF NURSING
3. Law of Excluded Middle:
 This law states that for any proposition, either it is true or its
negation is true. Symbolically, it can be expressed as A∨¬A.
 Example: For the statement "It is raining," either "It is raining" is
true, or "It is not raining" is true.