You are on page 1of 47

Propositional Logic

Rashidah Kasauli

Department of Networks
Block A, Level 3,Room 301
COCIS

Based on Rosen 1.1 - 1.3

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 1 / 47


Overview

1 Propositions

2 Logical Connectives

3 Logical Equivalence

4 Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 2 / 47


Propositions

Propositions

A proposition is a declarative sentence that can be either true or false


“Tom has an Apple laptop.”
“Tom is a professor.”
“4 = 2 + 2”
“4 = 2 + 1”
Not propositions:
“Are you John?”
“y = 8”
“I am thin.”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 3 / 47


Propositions

Propositions

Which of the following are propositions?


Your place or mine?
x + y = y + x for all x, y ∈ r
If the world is flat, then 2 + 2 = 4.
Go directly to jail.
x −y =y −x

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 4 / 47


Propositions

Propositional variables

We use propositional variables to refer to propositions


Usually are lower case letters starting with p (i.e. p, q, r , s, etc.)
A propositional variable can have one of two values: true (T) or false
(F)
A proposition can be. . .
A single variable: p - atomic proposition
An operation of multiple variables: p ∧ (q ∨ ¬r ) - composite
proposition

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 5 / 47


Logical Connectives

Introduction to logical operators

About a dozen logical operators


Similar to algebraic operators + ∗ −/
Consider the following propositions for example:
p = “Today is Friday”
q = “Today is my birthday”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 6 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical operators - NOT

A “not” operation switches (negates) the truth value


Symbol: ¬ or ∼
¬p = “Today is not Friday”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 7 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical operators - NOT

A “not” operation switches (negates) the truth value


Symbol: ¬ or ∼
¬p = “Today is not Friday”

p ¬p
T F
F T

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 8 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: AND

An “and” operation is true if both operands are true


Symbol: ∧
It’s like the ‘A’ in And
p ∧ q = “Today is Friday and today is my birthday”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 9 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: AND

An “and” operation is true if both operands are true


Symbol: ∧
It’s like the ‘A’ in And
p ∧ q = “Today is Friday and today is my birthday”

p q p∧q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 10 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: OR

An “or” operation is true if either operands are true


Symbol: ∨
p ∨ q = “Today is Friday or today is my birthday (or possibly both)”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 11 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: OR

An “or” operation is true if either operands are true


Symbol: ∨
p ∨ q = “Today is Friday or today is my birthday (or possibly both)”

p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 12 / 47


Logical Connectives

Exclusive Or (XOR)

Symbol: ⊕

p q p⊕q
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 13 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: Conditional

The conditional statement p → q is the proposition “if p then q”


Symbol: →
p is called the hypothesis and q the conclusion.
The conditional implication p → q means that the truth of p implies
the truth of q i.e if p is true, then q must be true.
Therefore this implication will only fail if p is true while q is false.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 14 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: Conditional

p → q = “If today is Friday, then today is my birthday”

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 15 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical Operators: Conditional

Example
Let p = “I am elected” and q = “I will lower taxes”
p → q = “If I am elected, then I will lower taxes”
Consider all possibilities
Note that if p is false, then the conditional is true regardless of
whether q is true or false

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 16 / 47


Logical Connectives

Conditional Implication
Different ways to express a conditional statement
“if p, then q”
“p implies q”
“if p, q”
“p only if q”
“p is sufficient for q”
“a sufficient condition for q is p”
“q if p”
“q whenever p”
“q when p”
“q is necessary for p”
“a necessary condition for p is q”
“q follows from p”
Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 17 / 47
Logical Connectives

Translating English Sentences

Example 1:
p = “It is below freezing”
q = “It is snowing”
1 It is below freezing and it is snowing p ∧ q
2 It is below freezing but not snowing p ∧ ¬q
3 It is not below freezing and it is not snowing ¬p ∧ ¬q
4 It is either snowing or below freezing (or both) p ∨ q
5 If it is below freezing, it is also snowing p ∧ ¬q

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 18 / 47


Logical Connectives

Translating to English...

Example 2:
Let p,q,r be the following propositions:
P =“it is raining”,
q =“the sun is shining”,
r =“there are clouds in the sky.”
Translate the following into logical notation , using p,q,r and the logical
connectives.
It is raining and the sun is shining.
If it is raining then there are clouds in the sky.
If it is not raining, then the sun is not shining and there are clouds in
the sky.
If there are no clouds in the sky, then the sun is shining.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 19 / 47


Logical Connectives

Logical operators: Try out

1. Translate the following into English statements


a. (p ∧ q) → r
b. (p → r ) → q
c. ¬(p ∨ q) ∧ r
d. Give the truth values of the propositions for (a) and (b).
2. State which of the following are propositions and give the truth values

x2 = x ∀x ∈ r
x2 = x ∃x ∈ r

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 20 / 47


Logical Connectives

Precedence of Operators

Just as in algebra, operators have precedence


4 + 3 ∗ 2 = 4 + (3 ∗ 2), not (4 + 3) ∗ 2
Precedence order (from highest to lowest):
¬ ∧ ∨ → ↔
The first three are the most important
This means that p ∨ q ∧ ¬r → s ↔ t yields:
(p ∨ (q ∧ (¬r )) → s) ↔ (t)
Not is always performed before any other operation

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 21 / 47


Logical Connectives

Special results in a truth table

Tautological proposition (Tautology)


A tautology is a proposition that’s always TRUE.
Contradictory proposition (contradiction)
A contradiction is a proposition that’s always FALSE.
Logical equivalence of two propositions
Two statements are logically equivalent if they will be true in exactly
the same cases and false in exactly the same cases
Symbol ≡ and sometimes ⇔

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 22 / 47


Logical Connectives

Tautologies and Contradictions

Examples
Tautology: p ∨ ¬p
¬(p ∧ q) ↔ (¬p) ∨ (¬q)
Contradiction: p ∧ ¬p
¬(¬(p ∧ q) ↔ (¬p) ∨ (¬q))

p ¬p p ∨ ¬p p ∧ ¬p
T F T F
F T T F

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 23 / 47


Logical Connectives

Necessary AND Sufficient Condition

↔ ::= IFF

p q p↔q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 24 / 47


Logical Connectives

Necessary AND Sufficient Condition

↔ ::= IFF

p q p↔q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T

Note: P ↔ Q is equivalent to (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P)

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 25 / 47


Logical Connectives

Necessary AND Sufficient Condition

↔ ::= IFF

p q p↔q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T

Note: P ↔ Q is equivalent to (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P)
Note: P ↔ Q is equivalent to (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P)

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 26 / 47


Logical Connectives

Necessary AND Sufficient Condition

↔ ::= IFF

p q p↔q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T

Note: P ↔ Q is equivalent to (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P)
Note: P ↔ Q is equivalent to (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P)
Is the statement “x is an even number if and only if x 2 is an even
number” true?

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 27 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Conditional statements: Converse , Contrapositive and


Inverse

For conditional statement p → q


Converse: q → p
Contrapositive: ¬q → ¬p
Inverse: ¬p → ¬q
Contrapositive and conditional statements are equivalent
Also, converse and inverse statements are equivalent

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 28 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Contrapositive

The contrapositive of ”if p then q” is ”if ¬q. then ¬p”.

Statement: If you are a BSE year 1 student, then you are taking BSE 1107.
Contrapositive: If you are not taking MTH 3105, then you are not a BSE
year 2 student.

Statement: If x 2 is an even number, the x is an even number.


Contrapositive: If x is not an even number, then x 2 is not an even number.

A conditional statement is logically equivalent to its contrapositive.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 29 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Proofs

Statement: If P, then Q.
Contrapositive: If ¬Q, then ¬P.

P Q P→Q ¬Q ¬P ¬Q → ¬P
T T T F F T
T F F T F F
F T T F T T
F F T T T T

P → Q ≡ ¬P ∨ Q ≡ Q ∨ ¬P ≡ ¬Q → ¬P

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 30 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Logical Equivalences

Double negation law:


¬(¬p) ≡ p
Commutative laws:
p ∨ q ≡ q ∨ p and p ∧ q ≡ q ∧ p
Associative laws:
(p ∧ q) ∧ r ≡ p ∧ (q ∧ r ) and (p ∨ q) ∨ r ≡ p ∨ (q ∨ r )
Distributive laws:
p ∧ (q ∨ r ) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r ) and p ∨ (q ∧ r ) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r )
Absorption laws:
p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p and p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 31 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Logical Equivalences....

Idempotent:
p ∧ p ≡ p and p ∨ p ∨ p
Identity:
p ∧ T ≡ p and p ∨ F ≡ p
Negation:
p ∨ ¬p ≡ T and p ∧ ¬p ≡ F
Universal bound:
p ∧ F ≡ F and p ∨ T ≡ T
Negations of T and F:
¬T ≡ F and ¬F ≡ T

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 32 / 47


Logical Equivalence

DeMorgan’s Laws

¬(p ∨ q) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q
Example in English: It is not the case that Pete or Quincy went to
the store. ≡ Pete did not go to the store and Quincy did not go to
the store.
¬(p ∧ q) ≡ ¬p ∨ ¬q
Example in English: It is not the case that both Pete and Quincy
went to the store. ≡ Pete did not go to the store or Quincy did not
go to the store.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 33 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Proof by laws

Example
Show that ¬(p ∨ (¬p ∧ q)) and ¬p ∧ ¬q are logically equivalent by
developing a series of logical equivalences.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 34 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Proof by laws

Example
Show that ¬(p ∨ (¬p ∧ q)) and ¬p ∧ ¬q are logically equivalent by
developing a series of logical equivalences.
¬(p ∨ (¬p ∧ q)) ≡ ¬p ∧ ¬(¬p ∧ q) by the second DeMorgan law
≡ ¬p ∧ [¬(¬p) ∨ ¬q] by the first DeMorgan law
≡ ¬p ∧ (p ∨ ¬q) by the double negation law
≡ (¬p ∧ p) ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q) by the second distributive law
≡ F ∨ (¬p ∧ ¬q) because ¬p ∧ p ≡ F
≡ (¬p ∧ ¬q) ∨ F by the commutative law for disjunction
≡ ¬p ∧ ¬q by the identity law for F

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 35 / 47


Logical Equivalence

If then as Or

P → Q ≡?

Idea 1: Look at the truth rows and take the ”and”


(P ∧ Q) ∨ (¬P ∧ Q) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬Q)
p q p→q ≡ (P ∧ Q) ∨ [¬P ∧ (Q ∨ ¬Q)]
T T T ≡ (P ∧ Q) ∨ [¬P ∧ T ]
T F F ≡ (P ∧ Q) ∨ ¬P
F T T
≡ (P ∨ ¬P) ∧ (Q ∨ ¬P)
F F T
≡ T ∧ (Q ∨ ¬P)
≡ Q ∨ ¬P

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 36 / 47


Logical Equivalence

If then as Or

P → Q ≡?

Idea 2: Look at the false rows, take the ”and” and negate

¬(P ∧ ¬Q)
p q p→q ≡ ¬P ∨ Q
T T T
If you don’t give me all your
T F F money, then I will kill you.
F T T
Either you give me all your
F F T
money or I will kill you (or
both).

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 37 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Negation of If-Then

¬(p → q) ≡?
¬(p → q) ≡ ¬(¬P ∨ Q)
≡ P ∧ ¬Q)

If my computer is not working, then I cannot finish my homework.


My computer is not working but I can finish my homework.
If your GPA is 4.0, then you don’t need to pay tuition fee.
Your term GPA is 4.0 and you still need to pay tuition fee.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 38 / 47


Logical Equivalence

Maths Vs English

Parent = If you don’t clean your room, then you can’t watch the DVD.
Let C = clean your room, D = watch a DVD
This sentence says ¬C → ¬D
In real life it also means C → D
So C ↔ D
Mathematician: if a number x greater than 2 is not an odd number, then
x is not a prime number.
This sentence says ¬O → ¬P
But ofcourse it doesnot mean O → P

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 39 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Arguments

An argument is a sequence of statements.


All statements but the final one are called assumptions or hypothesis
or premises.
The final statement is called the conclusion.
An argument is valid if:
whenever all the assumptions are true, the conclusion is also true

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 40 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Valid Argument?

(P → Q), (Q → R), (R → P)
Is it valid?
P ∧Q ∧R

P Q R P→Q Q→R R→P P ∧Q ∧R OK?


T T T T T T T yes
T T F T F T F yes
T F T F T T F yes
T F F F T T F yes
F T T T T F F yes
F T F T F T F yes
F F T T T F F yes
F F F T T T F no

To prove an argument is not valid, we just need to find a counterexample.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 41 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Modus Ponens

If p then q If rain, then class cancelled.


p Rain.
∴ q ∴ Class cancelled.

p q p→q p q
T T T T T
T F F T F
F T T F T
F F T F F

Assumptions

Modus Ponens is latin meaning method of affirming.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 42 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Modus Tollens

If p then q If rain, then class cancelled.


¬q Class not cancelled.
∴ ¬p ∴ No rain.

p q p→q ¬q ¬p
T T T F F
T F F T F
F T T F T
F F T T T

Assumptions

Modus Tollens is latin meaning method of denying.

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 43 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Rules of inference

Rule of inference Tautology Name


p
p→q
(p ∧ (p → q)) → q Modus ponens
∴q
¬q
p→q
(¬q ∧ (p → q)) → ¬p Modus tollens
∴ ¬p
p→q
q→r
((p → q) ∧ (q → r )) → (p → r ) Hypothetical syllogism
∴p→r
p∨q
¬p
((p ∨ q) ∧ ¬p) → q Disjunctive syllogism
∴q
Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 44 / 47
Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Rules of inference....

p
p → (p ∨ q) Addition
∴p∨q
p∧q
(p ∧ q) → p Simplification
∴p
p
q
((p) ∧ (q)) → (p ∧ q) Conjunction
∴p∧q
p∨q
¬p ∨ r
((p ∨ q) ∧ (¬p ∨ r )) → (q ∨ r ) Resolution
∴q∨r

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 45 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

Exercise

1 For these collections of premises, what relevant conclusion or


conclusions can be drawn? Explain the rules of inference used to
obtain each conclusion from the premises.
“If I take the day off, it either rains or snows.”
“I took Tuesday off or I took Thursday off.”
“It was sunny on Tuesday.”
“It did not snow on Thursday.”
2 Show that the premises
“It is not sunny this afternoon and it is colder than yesterday,”
“We will go swimming only if it is sunny,”
“If we do not go swimming, then we will take a canoe trip,”
“If we take a canoe trip, then we will be home by sunset”
lead to the conclusion
“We will be home by sunset.”

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 46 / 47


Deductive and Hypothetical Reasoning

The End

Rashidah Kasauli BSE 1107 47 / 47

You might also like