Scribd
Upload
169 views16 pages

Logic 5.3

Uploaded by

Shane Michael Naigal
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
169 views16 pages

Logic 5.3

Uploaded by

Shane Michael Naigal
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

3/22/21

CHAPTER

5
Logic

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

5.3
Section The Conditional and the
Biconditional

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

1
3/22/21

Conditional Statements

Conditional Statements
Conditional statements can be written in if p, then q form
or in if p, q form. For instance, all of the following are
conditional statements.
If we order pizza, then we can have it delivered.
If you go to the movie, you will not be able to meet us for
dinner.
If n is a prime number greater than 2, then n is an odd
number.
In any conditional statement represented by “If p, then q” or
by “If p, q,” the p statement is called the antecedent and
the q statement is called the consequent.
4

2
3/22/21

Example 1 – Identify the Antecedent and Consequent of a Conditional

Identify the antecedent and consequent in the following


statements.

a. If our school was this nice, I would go there more than


once a week.—The Basketball Diaries
a. Antecedent: our school was this nice
Consequent: I would go there more than once a week
b. If you don’t get in that plane, you’ll regret it.
—Casablanca
b. Antecedent: you don’t get in that plane
Consequent: you’ll regret it

c. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you


can possibly imagine.—Obi-Wan Kenobi, Star Wars,
Episode IV, A New Hope

c. Antecedent: you strike me down


Consequent: I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine 5

Check your progress 1 (page 185)

3
3/22/21

Conditional Statements (p. 185)

The Truth Table for the Conditional


p®q

4
3/22/21

The Truth Table for the Conditional p ® q

To determine the truth table for p ® q, consider the


advertising slogan for a web authoring software product
that states, “If you can use a word processor, you can
create a webpage.”

This slogan is a conditional statement.

The antecedent is p, “you can use a word processor,” and


the consequent is q, “you can create a webpage.”

The Truth Table for the Conditional p ® q

Now consider the truth value of p ® q for each of the


following four possibilities.

Table 3.7
5.7

10

10

5
3/22/21

The Truth Table for the Conditional p ® q


Row 1: Antecedent T, Consequent T
You can use a word processor, and you can create a webpage. In this case the truth value of
the advertisement is true. To complete Table 5.7, we place a T in place of the question mark in
row 1.

Row 2: Antecedent T, Consequent F


You can use a word processor, but you cannot create a webpage. In this case the
advertisement is false. We put an F in place of the question mark in row 2 of Table 5.7.

Row 3: Antecedent F, Consequent T


You cannot use a word processor, but you can create a webpage. Because the advertisement
does not make any statement about what you might or might not be able to do if you cannot use
a word processor, we cannot state that
the advertisement is false, and we are compelled to place a T in place of the question mark in
row 3 of Table 5.7.

Row 4: Antecedent F, Consequent F


You cannot use a word processor, and you cannot create a webpage. Once again we must
consider the truth value in this case to be true because the advertisement does not make any
statement about what you might or might not be able to do if you cannot use a word processor.
We place a T in place of the question mark in row 4 of Table 5.7.
11

11

The Truth Table for the Conditional p ® q

Table 5.7

Truth Table for p ® q


Table 5.8
12

12

6
3/22/21

The Truth Table for the Conditional p ® q

The truth table for the conditional p ® q is given in Table


5.8.

Truth Table for p ® q


Table 5.8

13

13

14

14

7
3/22/21

Check your progress 2 (page 186)

15

15

Example 3 – Construct a Truth Table for a Statement Involving a Conditional (p.186)

Construct a truth table for .

Solution:
Enter the truth values for each simple statement and its
negation as shown in columns 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Use the truth values in columns 2 and 3 to determine the


truth values to enter in column 5, under the “or” connective.

Use the truth values in columns 1 and 5 to determine the


truth values to enter in column 6 under the “and”
connective.
16

16

8
3/22/21

Example 3 – Solution cont’d

Use the truth values in columns 6 and 4 to determine the


truth values to enter in column 7 under the “If . . . then”
connective.

17

17

Check your progress 3 (page 187)

18

18

9
3/22/21

An Equivalent Form of the


Conditional

19

19

An Equivalent Form of the Conditional


The truth table for ~p q is shown in Table 5.9. The truth
values in this table are identical to the truth values in Table
5.8.

Truth Table for ~p q Truth Table for p ® q


Table 5.9 Table 5.8

20

20

10
3/22/21

An Equivalent Form of the Conditional


Hence, the conditional p ® q is equivalent to the disjunction
~p q.

21

21

Example 4 – Write a Conditional in Its Equivalent Disjunctive Form

Write each of the following in its equivalent disjunctive form.

a. If I could play the guitar, I would join the band.


b. If Cam Newton cannot play, then his team will lose.

Solution:
In each case we write the disjunction of the negation of the
antecedent and the consequent.

a. I cannot play the guitar or I would join the band.


b. Cam Newton can play or his team will lose.
22

22

11
3/22/21

23

23

The Negation of the Conditional

24

24

12
3/22/21

The Negation of the Conditional


Because , an equivalent form of
is given by , which, by one of De Morgan’s laws,
can be expressed as the conjunction

25

25

Example 5 – Write the Negation of a Conditional Statement

Write the negation of each conditional statement.

a. If they pay me the money, I will sign the contract.


b. If the lines are parallel, then they do not intersect.

Solution:
In each case, we write the conjunction of the antecedent
and the negation of the consequent.

a. They paid me the money and I did not sign the contract.
b. The lines are parallel and they intersect.

26

26

13
3/22/21

27

27

The Biconditional

28

28

14
3/22/21

The Biconditional
The statement is called a biconditional
and is denoted by which is read as “p if and only if
q.”

29

29

The Biconditional
Table 5.10 shows that p q is true only when p and q
have the same truth value.

Truth Table for p q


Table 5.10

30

30

15
3/22/21

Example 7 – Determine the Truth Value of a Biconditional

State whether each biconditional is true or false.

a. x + 4 = 7 if and only if x = 3.
b. x2 = 36 if and only if x = 6.

Solution:
a. Both equations are true when x = 3, and both are false
when x ¹ 3. Both equations have the same truth value
for any value of x, so this is a true statement.

b. If x = –6, the first equation is true and the second


equation is false. Thus this is a false statement.

31

31

32

32

16

Common questions

Powered by AI

The evaluation of truth values in a truth table assists in understanding logical equivalence by providing a clear and systematic method to compare different statement forms across all possible scenarios. By showing that two statements consistently share the same truth values in each possible case, a truth table validates logical equivalences, such as between conditionals and their disjunctive forms, or biconditionals with equivalent statements, thus confirming theoretical assertions and practical applications in logical reasoning .

The truth table for the conditional p → q shows that the statement is true in all cases except when the antecedent p is true and the consequent q is false. This table is significant because it helps in understanding the conditions under which a conditional statement is deemed true or false, thus providing a concrete method to evaluate logical expressions involving conditionals in arguments and theoretical reasoning .

Constructing truth tables for statements and their negations provides a comprehensive framework for understanding logical arguments by mapping out how altering the truth value of component propositions affects overall validity. This practice helps in identifying and resolving contradictions, foreseeably false conclusions, and misunderstandings in logical constructs, thereby serving as a critical tool in both educational contexts and practical applications of logic where nuanced distinctions in logical truth are necessary .

Truth tables are essential in constructing logical arguments involving conditional statements because they systematically demonstrate all possible truth values of a statement based on various truth conditions of its components. This allows for precise identification of when a conditional argument holds or fails, thereby serving as a fundamental analytical tool in evaluating the validity of logical arguments and ensuring that logical deductions are sound and valid .

Truth tables provide a foundational understanding of the logical behavior of biconditional statements by clearly outlining that p ↔ q is true only when both statements share the same truth value. This structure helps in analyzing logical arguments by simplifying the evaluation process to a straightforward comparison of two statements, ensuring consistent truth values across equivalence tests, which is a critical aspect of logical reasoning .

Negating a conditional statement p → q results in the conjunction of the antecedent and the negation of the consequent, expressed as p ∧ ¬q. This transformation is meaningful as it highlights the scenario under which the conditional statement is false, namely when p is true and q is false. Understanding this structure provides clarity on the falsity conditions of conditionals, which is crucial for logical analysis and constructing rigorous arguments .

The conditional statement p → q is equivalent to the disjunction ~p ∨ q. This equivalence implies that for logical reasoning, one can transform conditional statements into a form where either the negation of the antecedent holds, or the consequent does. This transformation helps simplify complex logical expressions by converting conditionals into disjunctions, which are sometimes easier to manipulate in proofs and arguments .

A biconditional statement p ↔ q holds true only when both the antecedent p and the consequent q have the same truth value, either both true or both false. This provides a logical insight that p and q are equivalent in terms of their truth content, indicating that they are necessary and sufficient conditions for each other. This is useful in logic to establish equivalence relationships between statements or conditions .

The equivalence between conditional statements (p → q) and disjunctions (~p ∨ q) highlights the principle that a conditional can be expressed by asserting that either the antecedent does not hold or the consequent does. This can be applied in logical deductions by allowing conditionals to be manipulated as disjunctions, which can integrate more seamlessly into certain logical frameworks such as in disjunctive syllogisms, aiding in both proofs and simplifications of complex expressions .

Rewriting a conditional statement p → q in its equivalent disjunctive form ~p ∨ q implies that for deductive reasoning, one can employ a more direct disjunctive framework, facilitating the use of disjunctive inference rules. This conversion is particularly useful in streamlining proofs and deductions, allowing for strategic manipulation of logical arguments, especially when negative conditions or alternative scenarios play a vital role in the reasoning process .

You might also like