Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept.

of Philosophy, University of Mumbai

M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

Conditional Proof is an additional rule in Copis list:

The rule of C.P. is both necessary and useful in deduction. Since, without it the
validity of some arguments cannot be demonstrated. And it is useful because by
applying this rule we make the proof shorter and simpler.

To apply the rule of C.P. we must first note the form of the conclusion. If it is
implicative, then it’s antecedent can be added to the original set of premises, by
way of additional premise.

So now we have to prove only the consequent of the implicative conclusion

from the original premises and plus the assumption by rules of inference and
replacement.

When we deduce the consequent from original premises and assumption; we

have to close/discharge the assumption because our purpose of assumption is
completed.

The rule of C.P. is both necessary and useful in deduction. Since, without it the
validity of some arguments can not be demonstrated. And it is useful because by
applying this rule we make the proof shorter and simpler.

To apply the rule of C.P. we must first note the form of the conclusion. If it is
implicative, then it’s antecedent can be added to the original set of premises, by
way of additional premise.

So now we have to prove only the consequent of the implicative conclusion

from the original premises and plus the assumption by rules of inference and
replacement.

When we deduce the consequent from original premises and assumption; we

have to close/discharge the assumption because our purpose of assumption is
completed.
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

2
To show the scope of assumption; we use the bent arrow. The head point to the
assumption. The shaft/handle of the arrow runs down until it reaches the last
line, which is proved on the basis of the assumption, then shaft bents inward.
After discharging the assumption in the next line, we write down the
implication which has the assumption as its antecedent proved on the basis of
the assumption as its consequent.

This application states the conclusion which we want to prove from the original
set of premises.

A deduction might make use of more than one assumption of limited scope. The
separate scope of both assumption are to be shown.

ↄ/∴

1. A ↄ B / ∴ A ↄ (A . B)

A C.P. Assumption

B M.P

A .B Conjunction

………..

A ↄ (A . B) 2-4 C.P.

The rule of C.P. is genuine addition to the proof. Not only does it permit the
construction of shorter proof of validity for arguments that could be proved
valid by appealing to the original list of 19 rules of inference alone, but it
permits us to establish the validity of valid arguments whose validity couldn’t
be proved by reference to the original list alone.

The valid argument can’t use valid using only the list of 19 rules. But it is easily
proved valid using the new rule of C.P.
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

3
Adding the rule of I.P. serves to strengthen our proof apparatus still further. Any
argument whose conclusion is a tautology can be shown to be valid, by the
method of Truth tables, regardless of what its premisesses may be.

But if the tautologus conclusion of an argument is not a conditionalstatement

and the premises are consistent with each other and quiet irrelevant to that
conclusion then the argument cannot be proved valid using only the methods of
formal proofs of validity 9+10,C.P.

The rule of I.P. must be used.

1. A / .. B v (B ↄ C)
2. ~[ B v (B ↄ C)]
3. ~[ B v (~B v C)]
4. ~[ (B v ~B) v C]
5. ~( B v ~B) . ~ C)
6. ~( B v ~B)
7. ~B . ~~B

A formal proof of tautologies is a sequence of statements each of which is either

an assumption of limited scope or follows validity from one or two of the
preceding lines by rules of inference or follows from a sequence of [receding
lines by the principle of C.P.

(A ↄ B) ↄ [(B ↄ C) ↄ (A ↄ C)]

1. A ↄ B Assum
2. B ↄ C Assum
3. Aↄ C H.S.
4. (B ↄ C) ↄ (A ↄ C) 2-3 C.P.
5. (A ↄ B) ↄ [(B ↄ C) ↄ (A ↄ C)]

…………………………
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

Exercise: (Use only C.P. Rule with 19 rules)

1. If you stay on the ground floor, then the mosquitos will bite you; and if
you stay, on the top floor, you’ll miss the greenery. Hence if you stay on
the found floor or the top floor, then either the mosquitos will bite you or
you’ll miss the greenery. (G, B, T , M)
2. If the old age is inevitable, then youthfulness does not remain forever. If
the old age is inevitable, then if youthfulness does not remain forever,
then one should understand this fact of life. If youthfulness does not
remain forever, then if one should understand this fact of life, then
Siddharth will strive for enlightenment. Therefore if old age is inevitable,
then Siddhartha will strive for enlightenment. (O, Y, U, S)
3. If the climate is pleasant, then either I’ll continue go stay there or I will
permanently leave the home town. If I change my life-style, then either
I’ll face the new environment or I’ll permanently leave the home town. I
won’t permanently leave my home town. So if neither I’ll continue to
stay there nor I’ll face the new environment, then neither the climate is
pleasant nor will I change my life-style. (C,S, P, L, F)
4. If you write with steel holder; you will be able to write very slowly; and
if you write with ball-point pen, then your handwriting will not be artistic.
It follows that if you write with both the steel holder and ball-point pen,
then you’ll be able to write very slowly, and your handwritings will not
be artistic. (H, S, B, A)
5. If either Ardesheer or Behramahah fights the battle, then if either Cyrus
or Eruch support, then Zohak does not win but Fredoon wins it. If either
Zohak of Sikander does not win, Mezdayasni will survive. It implies that
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

5
if Ardesheer fights the battle, then if Cyrus supports, then Mazdayaani
will survive. (A, B, C, E, Z, F, S,M)

1. (G ↄ B) . (T ↄ M) / ∴ (G v T) ↄ (B v M)
2. G v T
3. B v M 1,2 C.D.
---------------------------
4. (G v T) ↄ (B v M) 2-3 C.P.

• Indirect Proof is an additional rule in Copis list:

In mathematics it is called Reduction Ad Absurdum Method.

Euclin proved every theorems in Geometry by using the rule of Reduction Ad

Absurdum in which h starting with an assumption with the theory is true as false
and their once this assumption got reduce to an absurdity or impossibility, or a
contradiction having shown this imply that the assumption itself is wrong, and
therefore theorem to be proved is right.

This Eulcin Methodology is trace to formal logic in which we use it as a rule of

Indirect proof.

Given a truth functional argument we construct an I.P. of validity by assuming

the denial of the conclusion as an additional premise and then demonstrated that
at least to a contradiction.

The method of Indirect deductive Proof is based on Reduction Ad Absurdum

Principle that is to show that opposite of what is to be proved, leads to an
absurdity by the method of I.P., we first assume the negation of the conclusion.

Once we get the contraction, proves that our given assumption is wrong. Proof
of an argument is complete when we obtain a contradiction.
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

6
But it is also possible to obtain the conclusion by itself. When we do so then the
method of I.P. is said to be used as a special case of strengthen rule of
Conditional Proof.

After proving the contraction, the conclusion is added to that contradictory

component and again it is proved by D.S.

After deriving the conclusion, the scope of ASSUMPTION has to be

discharged.

So we get an implicative proposition whose antecedent is the negation of the

conclusion and consequent is the conclusion itself.

From this statement by using the rules of Implication, double negation and
tautology we derive the conclusion.

(Every case of I.P. is a case of C.P. but every case of C.P. is not a case of I.P.)

…………………………

Exercise: (Use C.P. and I.P. Rule with 19 rules)

Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

Shorter truth Table Method

Why shorter truth table Method is more convenient than the Truth Table
Method?

Shorter Truth Table Method is the process of assigning truth values. It is based
on the principle of “Reduction Ad Absurdum”.

In this method the value of the truth functional proposition is considered as a

false. This is the assumption.

As per the assumption the values are assigned to the components and variables
of the components, while proving our assumption as true.

Sometime; two different values are assigned to the one and the same variable.
But as per the principle a proposition can’t have both values. It is either true or
false. So when any of the variables is assigned two different values
simultaneously then the contradiction is proved. This is because of the
assumption.

Therefore the contradiction that is absurdity proves the assumption as false, and
the given truth functional proposition is proved to be tautologies.
Dr. Archana, Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Mumbai
M.A. Sem III- First Order Sentential Logic
Unit III :C.P. I.P and Shorter Truth Table method

8
Suppose such type of absurdity is not proved then the proposition is proved as
not tautologies, it will be either contingent or contradictory.

With this method validity of arguments can also be tested.

For testing validity of the argument is assumed as invalid. So the conclusion of

the argument is assumed as false and premises are true. As per the assumption
values are assigned to the premises and to the conclusion. In assigning values to
the variables, if we get contradictory values then the given argument is proved
as valid. If there is no absurdity then argument proves to be invalid.

This method is more convenient then Truth Table Method. If a truth functional
compound proposition contains more than 5 variables then rows of true values
also increase.

For five variables we have to arrange 32 rows for 6 variables 64 and so on.

In such cases it becomes very inconvenient and lengthy to determine the

validity of the argument as well as in proving the truth functional compound
proposition.

This difficulty is avoided in shorter truth table method, therefore this method is
more convenient then truth table method.

------------------------------