Significance of Arguments

Arguments also play an important role in propositional logic, where they

refer to the input values (propositions or logical statements) that are
evaluated in logical expressions, truth tables, and proofs. In propositional
Logic, the truth value of logical statements depends on the arguments
provided (such as propositions or predicates).

Key Concepts

1.​ Proposition: A declarative statement that is either true or false, but

not both. For example, “The sky is blue” is a proposition.

2.​ Logical Connectives: Logical connectives are symbols or words

used to connect propositions to form more complex statements. The

common connectives include:

●​ AND (∧): True if both propositions are true.

●​ OR (∨): True if at least one proposition is true.

●​ NOT (¬): True if the proposition is false.

●​ IMPLICATION (→): True if when the first proposition

(antecedent) is true, the second (consequent) is also true.

●​ BICONDITIONAL (↔): True if both propositions are either

true or false.

3.​ Argument: Consists of a set of propositions, called premises, and a

conclusion. The goal is to determine whether the conclusion

logically follows from the premises.

 4.​ Validity: An argument is considered valid if, assuming the premises

are true, the conclusion must also be true. Validity concerns the form

of the argument rather than the actual truth of the premises. If the

premises are true and the argument is valid, the conclusion must be

true.

5.​ Soundness: An argument is sound if it is both valid and its premises

are true. Sound arguments always have true conclusions.

Example of Arguments

Example-1 :

●​ Every student of Information Technology studies Data Structures.

●​ Data structures necessarily contain the study of arguments.

●​ Therefore, every student of Information Technology studies

arguments.

Example-2 :

●​ Every parent is a mature person.

●​ Children should listen to mature people.

●​ Therefore, every child should listen to their parents.

Example-3 :

●​ Every mother is a woman.

●​ All women are caring.

 ●​ Therefore, every mother is caring.

Types of Arguments in Propositional Logic

1. Valid and Invalid Arguments

●​ Valid Argument: An argument is valid if the conclusion logically

follows from the premises. In other words, if all the premises are

true, the conclusion must be true as well. Validity is about the

logical structure of the argument, not the actual truth of the

premises or the conclusion.

Premise 1: All humans are mortal.​

Premise 2: Socrates is a human.​

Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.​

In this example, if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true, so
the argument is valid.

●​ Invalid Argument: An argument is invalid if the conclusion does not

logically follow from the premises, even if the premises are true. An

invalid argument has a flaw in its logical structure, meaning the

conclusion could be false even if the premises are true.

Premise 1: If it rains, the ground is wet.​

Premise 2: The ground is wet.​

Conclusion: It is raining.​

This argument is invalid because the ground could be wet for reasons other
than rain (e.g., someone watered the garden).

2. Sound and Unsound Arguments

●​ Sound Argument: An argument is sound if it is both valid and its

premises are true. A sound argument guarantees the truth of the

conclusion. Soundness concerns both the logical structure (validity)

and the actual truth of the premises.

Premise 1: All birds have wings.​

Premise 2: A sparrow is a bird.​

Conclusion: A sparrow has wings.​

Since the argument is valid and the premises are true, the argument is sound.

●​ Unsound Argument: An argument is unsound if it is either invalid or

has one or more false premises, or both.

Example (Invalid but true premises):​

Premise 1: All cats are mammals.​

Premise 2: A dog is a mammal.​

Conclusion: A dog is a cat.​

This argument is unsound because, although the premises are true, the
argument is invalid.

Example (Valid but false premises):​

Premise 1: All mammals can fly.​

Premise 2: A bat is a mammal.​

Conclusion: A bat can fly.​

This argument is unsound because, although the argument is valid, the first
premise is false.

3. Deductive and Inductive Arguments

●​ Deductive Arguments: A deductive argument is one where the

conclusion is meant to follow necessarily from the premises. In a

valid deductive argument, if the premises are true, the conclusion

must be true. Deductive arguments are often used in mathematics

 and formal logic, where proofs are constructed. A deductive

argument is said to be sound if and only if it is both factually correct

and valid. Otherwise, deductive arguments are unsound.

Premise 1: All men are mortal.​

Premise 2: Aristotle is a man.​

Conclusion: Aristotle is mortal.​

In this deductive argument, the conclusion necessarily follows from the

premises.

●​ Inductive Arguments: An inductive argument is one where the

premises are meant to support the conclusion, but the conclusion is

not guaranteed to be true even if the premises are true. Inductive

reasoning involves generalizing from specific instances. Inductive

arguments are common in science, where conclusions are drawn

based on observations and experiments.

Premise: Every swan I have seen is white.​

Conclusion: All swans are white.​

This is an inductive argument because the conclusion is a generalization

based on specific observations. While the premises may provide strong
evidence, the conclusion is not necessarily true (e.g., black swans exist).

Uses and Application

●​ Arguments are used in computer programming.

●​ Arguments are used in critical thinking.

●​ Arguments are used to test logical ability.

●​ Arguments offer proof for a claim or conclusion.

●​ Argument mapping is useful in philosophy, management reporting,

military, and intelligence analysis, and public debates.

Methods of checking whether an argument is valid or

not

Method 1: (using critical rows)

●​ Make truth table and make all columns of the different premises

p1,p2,……….pn and also make a column of Q.

●​ Mark the rows in which all of p1,p2,……………..pn (i.e all premises) are

true. such rows are called critical rows.

 ●​ Then, in the critical rows, check the value of conclusion ‘Q’, if Q is

true in all the critical rows, then the conclusion is valid

Note: 1. There can be more than one critical row.

●​ If there is anyone critical row in which Q is false, then the argument

is invalid.

●​ For the argument to be valid, ‘Q’ should be confirmed in all the

critical rows in the truth table.

Method 2: ( Tautology Method )

Just make a truth table in which make the columns of p1,p2,p3………..pn, Q ,

p1∧p2∧p3………pn and finally p1∧p2∧p3∧……pn->Q.

if p1∧p2∧………….pn -> Q is a Tautology, then the argument is valid.

Formal Logic and Arguments
Formal logic is a branch of logic that deals with the principles of valid
reasoning using formal languages and symbolic representations. In formal
logic, arguments are expressed in a precise, unambiguous way, which allows
for rigorous analysis of their validity. This is crucial in fields such as
mathematics, computer science, and philosophy, where clear and accurate
reasoning is essential.

Components of Formal Logic

1.​ Proposition: It is a statement that can be either true or false. In

formal logic, propositions are usually represented by variables like p,

q, r, etc.

2.​ Logical connectives: Symbols used to connect propositions and

form compound statements. The main logical connectives are:

●​ Negation (¬): The negation of a proposition p, written as

¬p, is true if p is false, and false if p is true.

●​ Conjunction (∧): The conjunction of p and q, written as p

∧ q, is true if both p and q are true, and false otherwise.

●​ Disjunction (∨): The disjunction of p and q, written as p ∨

q, is true if at least one of p or q is true, and false

otherwise.

●​ Implication (→): The implication p → q is true if p is false

or q is true (or both). It is only false when p is true and q is

false.
 ●​ Biconditional (↔): The biconditional p ↔ q is true if both p

and q are either true or false simultaneously.

3.​ Truth tables: Used to systematically explore all possible truth

values of propositions and their combinations. They are essential

tools in determining the validity of logical statements and

arguments.

4.​ Logical Equivalence: Two statements are logically equivalent if they

have the same truth value in every possible situation. Logical

equivalence is denoted by ≡.

5.​ Quantifiers: In formal logic, especially in predicate logic, quantifiers

are used to express statements involving variables.

●​ Universal Quantifier (∀): Indicates that a proposition is

true for all elements in a domain. For example, ∀x P(x)

means “For all x, P(x) is true.”

●​ Existential Quantifier (∃): Indicates that there exists at

least one element in a domain for which the proposition is

true. For example, ∃x P(x) means “There exists an x such

that P(x) is true.”

Arguments in Formal Logic

●​ Formal Argument Structure: An argument in formal logic is

composed of a set of premises and a conclusion. The goal is to

determine whether the conclusion logically follows from the

premises.

Premise 1: p → q​

Premise 2: p​

Conclusion: q​

This is a classic example of modus ponens, a valid argument form.

●​ Validity and Soundness in Formal Logic: An argument is valid if the

conclusion follows logically from the premises, regardless of the

actual truth of the premises. An argument is sound if it is valid and

all its premises are true.

●​ Common Argument Forms:

○​ Modus Ponens (Affirming the Antecedent): p → q,

p, therefore q. If it rains, the ground will be wet. It is

raining. Therefore, the ground is wet.

 ○​ Modus Tollens (Denying the Consequent): p → q,

¬q, therefore ¬p. If it rains, the ground will be wet.

The ground is not wet. Therefore, it is not raining.

○​ Disjunctive Syllogism: p ∨ q, ¬p, therefore q. Either

the light is on, or it is off. The light is not on.

Therefore, it is off.

○​ Hypothetical Syllogism: p → q, q → r, therefore p →

r. If I study, I will pass the exam. If I pass the exam, I

will graduate. Therefore, if I study, I will graduate.

●​ Formal Proofs: A formal proof is a sequence of statements, each of

which is either a premise or follows from previous statements by a

rule of inference, culminating in the conclusion. Formal proofs are

central in mathematics, where they are used to demonstrate the

truth of theorems.

●​ Common Logical Fallacies:

○​ Affirming the Consequent: Assuming that if p → q

and q is true, then p must be true, which is invalid.

○​ Denying the Antecedent: Assuming that if p → q

and p is false, then q must be false, which is also

invalid.
Rules of Inference
1.​ Universal Instantiation (UI)

●​ Premise: ∀x P(x)

●​ Conclusion: P(c) for some specific c

●​ Explanation: If something is true for all elements in a

domain, it is true for any specific element in that domain.

2.​ Universal Generalization (UG)

●​ Premise: P(c) for some arbitrary c

●​ Conclusion: ∀x P(x)

●​ Explanation: If P is true for an arbitrary element c, then P is

true for all elements in the domain.

3.​ Existential Instantiation (EI)

●​ Premise: ∃x P(x)

●​ Conclusion: P(c) for some specific c

●​ Explanation: If there exists some element in the domain for

which P(x) is true, then P(x) is true for some specific

element c.

4.​ Existential Generalization (EG)

●​ Premise: P(c) for some specific c

●​ Conclusion: ∃x P(x)

●​ Explanation: If P is true for some specific element c, then

there exists an element in the domain for which P(x) is true.

Solved Examples on Arguments in Discrete
Mathematics
Example 1 : Premises:

1.​ If a number is even, then it is divisible by 2.

2.​ 6 is even.

Conclusion: 6 is divisible by 2.

Solution:

Since the conclusion logically follows from the premises, this is a valid
argument.

Example 2 : Premises:

1.​ If a person is a student, then they have a student ID.

2.​ Emma has a student ID.

Conclusion: Emma is a student.

Solution:

This is an invalid argument (affirming the consequent) because someone

might have a student ID without being a student.

Example 3: We have to check whether the argument (p ∨ q, p → r, q → r,

∴ r) is valid or not.

Solution:

As for this case, it has premises as p ∨ q, p → r while q → r and conclusion in

the form of r. This statement will be valid if the value of the premises is True
and True premises signifies True value of conclusion. We will prove it with
the help of a truth table, which is described as follows:

P q R p∨q p→r q→r

T T T T T T

T T F T F F

T F T T T T

T F F T F T

F T T T T T

F T F T T F
 F F T F T T

F F F F T T

In this table, if the premises (p ∨ q, p → r, q → r) are true, then the

conclusion (r) is also true. Hence, the above argument (p ∨ q, p → r, q → r, ∴
r) is valid.

Example 4: We have to check whether the argument (p → q, ∴ ∼ p → ∼ q)

is valid or not.

Solution:

In this case, premises are shown by p → q, and conclusion is shown by ∼ p →

∼ q. This statement will be valid if all the premises are true and true premises
also correspond to the true value of conclusion. We will prove it with the
help of a truth table, which is described as follows:
P q ∼p ∼q p→q ∼p→∼q

T T F F T T

T F F T F T

F T T F T F

F F T T T T

In this table, the critical rows are failed because, in the third row, the premise
(p q) is true while the value of conclusion is false. Hence, the above argument
is invalid.

Example 5: Premises:

1.​ All mammals have lungs.

2.​ A whale is a mammal.

Conclusion: A whale has lungs.

Solution:

This is a sound argument because the premises are true and the structure is
valid.

Practice Questions on Arguments

Questions 1: Determine if the following argument is valid or invalid:
Premises: “If it is sunny, I will go for a walk. I went for a walk.”​
Conclusion: “It is sunny.”

Questions 2: Identify whether the argument is sound:

Premises: “All flowers are plants. A rose is a flower.”​

Conclusion: “A rose is a plant.”

Questions 3: Use the truth table method to check if this argument is valid:

Premises: “If today is Friday, then I will go out. Today is Friday.”​

Conclusion: “I will go out.”

Questions 4: Determine if the argument is valid:

Premises: “If a person is honest, they tell the truth. Alice is telling the
truth.”​
Conclusion: “Alice is honest.”

Questions 5: Analyze if this is a deductive or inductive argument:

Premises: “The last five tests were difficult.”​

Conclusion: “The next test will also be difficult.”

Questions 6: Use the tautology method to verify the argument:

 Premises: “If it rains, I will stay home. It is raining.”​
Conclusion: “I will stay home.”

Questions 7: Identify the argument type and validity:

Premises: “All cars have wheels. A bicycle has wheels.”​

Conclusion: “A bicycle is a car.”

Questions 8: Apply the truth table to check validity:

Premises: “If I am thirsty, I will drink water. I am not drinking water.”​

Conclusion: “I am not thirsty.”

Questions 9: Determine the validity using logical connectives:

Premises: “If I study, I pass. I pass.”​

Conclusion: “I studied.”

Questions 10: Identify the soundness:

Premises: “All mammals have hair. A dolphin is a mammal.”​

Conclusion: “A dolphin has hair.”