click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
2 Be Logical
INTERMEDIATE Logic Lessons 22-24 plus some review
Question | Answer |
---|---|
consistent | when two or more propositions can be true at the same time |
inconsistent | when two or more propositions cannot be true at the same time |
dilemma | a valid argument which presents a choice between two conditionals |
formal proofs of validity | step-by-step deduction of a conclusion from a set of premises, each step being justified by an appropriate basic rule |
rules of inference | a valid argument form which can be used to justify steps in a proof |
QED | Quod erat demonstrandum (what was to be demonstrated) |
Start a proof by | . . . . comparing the conclusion with the premises. |
Try saying the premises out loud or in your head to | . . . . help you recognize which rule of inference to use. |
conditional proof | a special rule in a formal proof which allows us to assume the antecedent of a conditional and, once we deduce the consequent, to conclude the entire conditional |
CPA | conditional proof assumption |
Reductio ad Absurdum | a special rule which allows us to assume the negation of a proposition, deduce a self-contradiction, then conclude the proposition |
truth trees | a diagram that shows a set of propositions being decomposed into their literals |
decomposed | when a compound proposition is broken down into simple propositions (or the negation of simple propositions) which are called the literals |
literals | simple propositions or negated simple propositions which together compose a compound proposition |
recover the truth values | to determine the truth values of the simple propositions for which the propositions in the set would all be true |
open branch | a path on a truth tree which includes no contradictions |
closed branch | a path on a truth tree for which a contradiction has been found |
A conjunction decomposes by | separating into its conjuncts. |
SM | set member |
3x5 mean | line 3 contradicts line 5 |
No truth values can be recovered for | inconsistent sets. |
A disjunctions decomposes by | branching into its disjuncts. |
Truth trees may need to "branch" so that you can | consider several possible truth values for the literals. |
When using the truth tree method for consistency, you know that the set is consistent IF | at LEAST one branch is an OPEN branch. |
Conjunctions do NOT branch, but | negated conjunctions DO branch. |
Disjunctions BRANCH, but | negated disjunctions do NOT branch. |
Do NOT continue to decompose a branch on a proposition that has already | ended in a contradiction or a CLOSED branch. |
Do NOT skip the explicit decomposition of DOUBLE | negations. |
Conditionals BRANCH, but | negated conditional statements do NOT branch. |
Bi-conditionals AND negated bi-conditionals BOTH | branch. |
Whenever possible, the propositions which do NOT branch should be decomposed | before the propositions that DO branch. |
If you can tell which branches will end in a contradiction, decompose those | branches FIRST. This will simplify the truth tree. |
Stop creating the truth tree when you have | answered the question which has been asked. For example, if you are ONLY asked if a set is consistent, you MAY stop once you have ONE open branch. |
If none of the other decomposition suggestions for simplification apply, then try decomposing the most | complex propositions first. This will save you from rewriting them under multiple branches later. |
You do NOT need to decompose set member in the ____________ which they are given. Use the order which will generate the simplest truth tree. | ORDER |