BALASABAS, EUGENIO E.

MAED MATH-I

1. Define logic and the nature of proof.

 Logic is the study of the methods and principles used in distinguishing
correct from incorrect reasoning.
 Nature of proof is an inferential argument for a mathematical statement,
showing that the stated assumptions logically guarantee the conclusion.
2. Define statements/proposition. Give 5 examples of statements/propositions and 5
examples of non-statement.

Mathematical statement is the analogue of an English sentence; it is a correct

arrangement of mathematical symbols that states a complete thought. It makes
sense to as about the TRUTH of a sentence: Is it true? Is it false? Is it sometimes
true/sometimes false?

Example (statements/propositions):

1. The capital of Philippines is Manila.

2. Rizal park is in Cebu.

3. Butuan City is the capital of Agusan del Norte.

4. 5 + 3 = 8

5. 2+3 = 5

Example (non-statements):

1. 5 + 3 = 9

2. Solve the equation x3−7x2+10=0 .

3. (a+b)2=a2+b2

4. (a-b)2=a2-b2

5. 6 = 7

3. Enumerate, discuss, give 2 examples and show the truth tables of the operation
on statements.
Truth Table is used to perform logical operations in Maths. These
operations comprise boolean algebra or boolean functions. It is basically used to
check whether the propositional expression is true or false, as per the input values.
This is based on boolean algebra. It consists of columns for one or more input
values, says, P and Q and one assigned column for the output results. The output
which we get here is the result of the unary or binary operation performed on the
given input values. Some examples of binary operations are AND, OR, NOR,
XOR, XNOR, etc. We will learn all the operations here with their respective truth-
table.

Truth Table For Unary Operation

Unary consist of a single input, which is either True or False. For these
inputs, there are four unary operations, which we are going to perform here. They
are:

 Logical True (Only True)

 Logical False (Only False)
 Logical Identity
 Logical Negotiation

Logical True
In this operation, the output is always true, despite any input value.
Suppose P denotes the input values and Q denotes the output, then we can write
the table as;

P Q→T

T T

F T
Where T=True and F=False

Logical False
Unlike the logical true, the output values for logical false are always false. It
is also said to be unary falsum. Let us create a truth table for this operation.

P Q→F

T F

F F
Where T=True and F=False
Logical Identity
In this operation, the output value remains the same or equal to the input
value. Let us find out with the help of the table.

P Q→P

T T

F F
So, here you can see that even after the operation is performed on the input
value, its value remains unchanged.

Logical Negation
When we perform the logical negotiation operation on a single logical value
or propositional value, we get the opposite value of the input value, as an output.
Let us see the truth-table for this:

P Q→~P

T F

F T
The symbol ‘~’ denotes the negation of the value.

Truth Table for Binary Operations

The binary operation consists of two variables for input values. Here also,
the output result will be based on the operation performed on the input or
proposition values and it can be either True or False value. The major binary
operations are;

 AND
 OR
 NAND
 NOR
 XOR
 Conditional or ‘If-Then’
 Bi-conditional
Let us draw a consolidated truth table for all the binary operations, taking
the input values as P and Q.
 P Q AND OR NAND NOR XOR Conditional Bi-conditional

(∧) (∨) (~∧) (~∨) (⊻) (⇒) (⇔)

T T T T F F F T T

T F F T T F T F F

F T F T T F T T F

F F F F T T F T T

Where T stands for True and F stands for False.

Now let us discuss each binary operation here one by one.

AND & NAND Operation

From the table, you can see, for AND operation, the output is True only if
both the input values are true, else the output will be false. The AND operator is
denoted by the symbol (∧).
Whereas the negation of AND operation gives the output result for NAND
and is indicated as (~∧).

OR and NOR Operation

OR statement states that if any of the two input values are True, the output
result is TRUE always. It is represented by the symbol (∨).
But the NOR operation gives the output, opposite to OR operation. It means
the statement which is True for OR, is False for NOR. And it is expressed
as (~∨).

XOR Operation
This operation states, the input values should be exactly True or exactly
False. The symbol for XOR is (⊻).

Conditional and Bi-conditional Operation

Conditional or also known as ‘if-then’ operator, gives results as True for all
the input values except when True implies False case. It is denoted by ‘⇒’. This
operation is logically equivalent to ~P ∨ Q operation. Let us prove here;

P Q ~P ~P ∨ Q
 T T F T

T F F F

F T T T

F F T T

You can match the values of P⇒Q and ~P ∨ Q. Both are equal.
Bi-conditional is also known as Logical equality. If both the values of P and
Q are either True or False, then it generates a True output or else the result will
be false.

Example 3.1
Write the truth table for the following given statement:(P ∨ Q)∧(~P⇒Q).
Solution: Given, (P ∨ Q)∧(~P⇒Q)
Now let us create the table taking P and Q as two inputs,

P Q P∨Q ~P ~P⇒Q (P ∨ Q)∧(~P⇒Q)

T T T F T T

T F T F T T

F T T T T T

F F F T F F

Example 3.2

Construct a truth table for   .

4. Define arguments, validity of arguments, give 5 examples and show the truth
tables of the arguments.
Argument
A logical argument is a claim that a set of premises support a conclusion.
There are two general types of arguments: inductive and deductive arguments.

Argument Types
An inductive argument uses a collection of specific examples as its
premises and uses them to propose a general conclusion.

A deductive argument uses a collection of general statements as its

premises and uses them to propose a specific situation as the conclusion.

Argument validity
In evaluating an argument, we consider separately the truth of the
premises and the validity of the logical relationships between the premises, any
intermediate assertions and the conclusion. The main logical property of an
argument that is of concern to us here is whether it is truth preserving, that is if
the premises are true, then so is the conclusion. We will usually abbreviate this
property by saying simply that argument is valid.
If the argument is valid, the premises together entail or imply the conclusion.
The ways in which arguments go wrong tend to fall into certain patterns,
called logical fallacies.
Validity is a semantic characteristic of arguments; independently of this
property, and more controversially, arguments should also be scrutinizable, in the
 sense that the argument be open to public examination and systematic in the
sense that the structural components of the argument have public legitimacy.

Example 4.1

Consider the argument:

Premise:          If you bought bread, then you went to the store
Premise:          You bought bread
Conclusion:     You went to the store
While this example is hopefully fairly obviously a valid argument, we can
analyze it using a truth table by representing each of the premises symbolically.
We can then look at the implication that the premises together imply the
conclusion. If the truth table is a tautology (always true), then the argument is
valid.
We’ll get B represent “you bought bread” and S represent “you went to the
store”. Then the argument becomes:
Premise:          B → S
Premise:          B
Conclusion:     S
To test the validity, we look at whether the combination of both premises
implies the conclusion; is it true that [(B→S) ⋀ B] → S ?
B S B → S (B→S) ⋀ B [(B→S) ⋀ B] → S
T T T T T
Since the
T F F F T
truth table for
F T T F T
[(B→S) ⋀ B]
F F T F T
→ S is always
true, this is a valid argument.
Example 4.2
Premise:         If I go to the mall, then I’ll buy new jeans
Premise:          If I buy new jeans, I’ll buy a shirt to go with it
Conclusion:     If I got to the mall, I’ll buy a shirt.

Let M = I go to the mall, J = I buy jeans, and S = I buy a shirt.

The premises and conclusion can be stated as:

Premise:           M → J
Premise:           J → S
Conclusion:     M → S
We can construct a truth table for [(M→J) ⋀ (J→S)] → (M→S)
M J S M →  J →  (M→J) ⋀ (J→S) M →  [(M→J) ⋀ (J→S)] → (M→S)
J S S
T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F T
T F T F T F T T
T F F F T F F T
F T T T T T T T
F T F T F F T T
F F T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T

From the truth table, we can see this is a valid argument.

Example 4.3
The argument “All cats are mammals and a tiger is a cat, so a tiger is a
mammal” is a valid deductive argument.
The premises are:
All cats are mammals
A tiger is a cat
The conclusion is:
A tiger is a mammal
Let C = All the cats are mammals, T = A tiger is a cat, and M = A tiger is a
mammal.
The premises and conclusion can be stated as:

Premise:           C → T
Premise:           T → M
Conclusion:     C → M
We can construct a truth table for [(C→T) ⋀ (T→M)] → (C→M)
C T M C →  T →  (C → T) ⋀ (T → M) C →  [(C→T) ⋀ (T→M)] →
T M M (C→M)
T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F T
T F T F T F T T
T F F F T F F T
F T T T T T T T
F T F T F F T T
F F T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T
From the truth table, we can see this is a valid argument.
Example 4.4

Consider the argument:

Premise:          If you bought fish, then you went to the market
Premise:          You bought fish
Conclusion:     You went to the market
We’ll get F represent “you bought fish” and M represent “you went to the
market”. Then the argument becomes:
Premise:          F → M
Premise:          F
Conclusion:     M
To test the validity, we look at whether the combination of both premises
implies the conclusion; is it true that [(F → M) ⋀ F] → M ?

F M F → M (F→M) ⋀ F [(F→M) ⋀ F] → M

T T T T T
T F F F T
F T T F T
F F T F T
Since the
truth table for [(F → M) ⋀ F] → M  is always true, this is a valid argument.

Example 4.5

Consider: If x is even, then x2 +4x +1 is odd.

Premise: If x is even, then x2 +4x +1 is odd.

Premise: x is even

Conclusion: x2 +4x +1 is odd

Let A represent “x is even” and B represent “x 2 +4x +1 is odd”. The

arguments becomes:

Premise:         A → B
Premise:          A
Conclusion:     B
To test the validity, we look at whether the combination of both premises
implies the conclusion; is it true that [(A → B) ⋀ A] → B ?
 A B A → B (A→B) ⋀ A [(A→B) ⋀ A] → B
T T T T T
T F F F T
F T T F T
F F T F T

Since the
truth table for [(A→B) ⋀ A] → B is always true, this is a valid argument.

5. Define conditional and its variants

A conditional statement is a statement that can be written in the form “If P
then Q ,” where P and Q are sentences. For this conditional statement, P is
called the hypothesis and Q is called the conclusion.

Variants of conditionals

 Converse

In logic and mathematics, the converse of a categorical or implicational

statement is the result of reversing its two constituent statements. For the
implication P → Q, the converse is Q → P.

To form the converse of the conditional statement, interchange the

hypothesis and the conclusion.
      The converse of "If it rains, then they cancel school" is "If they cancel
school, then it rains."

 Inverse
In logic and mathematics, the inverse of a categorical or implicational
statement is the result of taking the negation of both the hypothesis and the
conclusion. For the implication P → Q, the inverse is P→
Q.

To form the inverse of the conditional statement, take the negation of both
the hypothesis and the conclusion.
       The inverse of “If it rains, then they cancel school” is “If it does not rain,
then they do not cancel school.”

 Contrapositive
In logic and mathematics, the inverse of a categorical or implicational
statement is the result of taking the negation reversing its two constituent
statements. For the implication P → Q, the inverse is ~Q → ~P.

To form the contrapositive of the conditional statement, interchange the

hypothesis and the conclusion of the inverse statement. 
  The contrapositive of "If it rains, then they cancel school" is "If they do not
cancel school, then it does not rain."

Statement If p, then q.

Converse If q, then p.
Inverse If not p, then not q.
Contrapositive If not q, then not p.

6. Enumerate and discuss the rules of interference or laws of logic

Rule of Name Rule of Inference Name

Inference

P∴P∨Q P∨Q¬P∴Q Disjunctive

Addition
Syllogism

PQ∴P∧Q P→QQ→R∴P→R Hypothetical

Conjunction
Syllogism

P∧Q∴P (P→Q)∧(R→S)P∨R∴Q∨S Constructive

Simplification
Dilemma
P→QP∴Q Modus (P→Q)∧(R→S)¬Q∨¬S∴¬P∨¬ Destructive
Ponens R Dilemma

P→Q¬Q∴¬P Modus Tollens

7. Provide 3 examples of each rule (proving the validity of the arguments)
1. Addition
Example 7.1.1
Consider the argument: He studies very hard.
Premise: He studies very hard.
Conclusion: Either he studies very hard, or he is a very bad student.
Let P represents the statement “ He studies very hard” and Q
represents the statement “he is a very bad student”. The arguments
become:
Premise: P
Conclusion: PvQ
To test the validity, we look at whether the premises imply the
conclusion; is it true that P → PvQ?

P Q PvQ P → PvQ
T T T T
T F T T
F T T T
F F F T

Since the truth table for P → PvQ is always true, this is a valid argument.
Example 7.1.2
Consider the argument: x is even.
Premise: x is even.
Conclusion: Either x is even, or x is odd.
Let P represents the statement “x is even” and Q represents the
statement “x is odd”. The arguments become:
Premise: P
Conclusion: PvQ
To test the validity, we look at whether the premises imply the
conclusion; is it true that P → PvQ?

P Q PvQ P → PvQ
T T T T
T F T T
F T T F
F F F T

Since the truth table for P → PvQ is always true, this is a valid argument.

Example 7.1.3
Consider the argument: x is odd.
Premise: x is odd.
Conclusion: Either x is odd, or x is even.
Let P represents the statement “x is odd” and Q represents the
statement “x is even”. The arguments become:
Premise: P
Conclusion: PvQ
To test the validity, we look at whether the premises imply the
conclusion; is it true that P → PvQ?

P Q PvQ P → PvQ
T T T T
T F T F
F T T T
F F F T
 Since the truth table for P → PvQ is always true, this is a valid argument.

2. Conjunction
Example 7.2.1
Consider the argument: He studies very hard, and he is the best boy in the
class.
Premise: He studies very hard
Premise: He is the best boy in the class
Conclusion: He studies very hard, and he is the best boy in the class.
Let P represents the statement “He studies very hard” and Q
represents the statement “He is the best boy in the class”. The arguments
become:
Premise: P
Premise: Q
Conclusion: P^Q
To test the validity, we look at whether the premises imply the
conclusion; is it true that P^Q?

P Q P^Q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
Since the truth table for P^Q is NOT always true, this is an invalid argument.