212 views

Uploaded by Ben Allen

save

- Practice Test 1 Solutions
- Solutions to Abstract Algebra - Chapter 1 (Dummit and Foote, 3e)
- Finance Syllabus
- Argumentos e Inferencia
- Age of Revolutions Summative Unit Project
- 1. Critical Thinking
- Solution to Stein Complex Analysis
- Rosen More Examples
- cover letter
- Math324 2a
- 0457 Marking Memeo
- Rudin Solutions Chapter 9
- Assignment 1 Marking Scheme
- UGC NET 2012 I
- dbq civilization rubric
- cl proc cat expanse
- 6 strategies to build a s c culture
- Persuasive Writing
- DASC20011 Assessment Criteria
- Arm Dyn Debate
- Treatise on Rhetorical Invention Book I
- Evaluating Practical Reasoning, D. Walton
- Brassier, Ray - Badiou's Materialist Epistemology of Mathematics
- henry david thoreau
- Critical Thinking Unit 2
- Ch07
- thoughtful arguments unit plan
- 05.arg.fin (1)
- brewer-1996-analogy.pdf
- Live Leak - IBPS PO Mains 2016 Model Question Paper Based on Predicted Pattern
- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
- Dispatches from Pluto: Lost and Found in the Mississippi Delta
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution
- Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
- Yes Please
- The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
- Grand Pursuit: The Story of Economic Genius
- This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate
- A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
- The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power
- John Adams
- Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America
- The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
- Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
- The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers
- Smart People Should Build Things: How to Restore Our Culture of Achievement, Build a Path for Entrepreneurs, and Create New Jobs in America
- Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
- The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
- How To Win Friends and Influence People
- Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
- Steve Jobs
- Bad Feminist: Essays
- You Too Can Have a Body Like Mine: A Novel
- The Incarnations: A Novel
- The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
- Leaving Berlin: A Novel
- The Silver Linings Playbook: A Novel
- The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
- Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close: A Novel
- A Man Called Ove: A Novel
- The Master
- Bel Canto
- We Are Not Ourselves: A Novel
- The First Bad Man: A Novel
- The Rosie Project: A Novel
- The Blazing World: A Novel
- Brooklyn: A Novel
- The Flamethrowers: A Novel
- Life of Pi
- The Love Affairs of Nathaniel P.: A Novel
- The Bonfire of the Vanities: A Novel
- Lovers at the Chameleon Club, Paris 1932: A Novel
- The Perks of Being a Wallflower
- A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel
- The Cider House Rules
- Wolf Hall: A Novel
- The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel
- The Wallcreeper
- Interpreter of Maladies
- The Kitchen House: A Novel
- Beautiful Ruins: A Novel
- Good in Bed

You are on page 1of 347

by John G. Bennett The University of Rochester

© 1999-2008 by John G. Bennett

i

Introductory Logic

Preface

This book reflects a consensus that developed in the University of Rochester Philosophy Department among David Braun, Ted Sider, and myself about what should be taught in the introductory symbolic logic course. The main outlines of this consensus were this:

C The course should give students a working knowledge of

first order predicate logic with identity. C The students should learn a natural deduction system somewhat like that of Kalish, Montague, and Mar, Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning,1 but simplified in various ways. The Kalish-Montague system employs SHOW lines to state conclusions before the steps that derive them from premises, allows assumptions only immediately after an appropriate SHOW line, and has quantifier rules that are simple, at the cost of being slightly more restrictive than necessary. The natural deduction system should be designed for ease of use, rather than for ease of proving meta-theorems. C The course should include appropriate informal semantics. C The course should focus on using and understanding the first-order language, rather than on meta-theory. We agreed that there was no satisfactory book meeting these criteria, hence this book. I have made a variety of additional decisions. I chose the rules for the natural deduction system to make proofs easy, without requiring the use of a theorem list, although I generally supply students with a sheet of diagrams of all the rules for tests. I also tried to include among the rules many of the simple inferences I would make myself in convincing myself that an argument was valid. In addition, I wanted the rules to include many logical principles whose omission would be disgraceful. All such choices of rules are ultimately arbitrary, and I do not pretend that my set is ideal. I have divided the rules into basic rules and derived rules,

1

second edition, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980 ii

even though a rigorous showing that the derived rules are dispensable is not supplied. Examples or exercises are available to illustrate how the derived rules of inference can be dispensed with, but the replacement rules cannot so easily be shown dispensable. Indeed, the most straightforward proof is as a corollary to a completeness proof for the basic rules, something that is well beyond the scope of this text. I have emphasized in the book the artificial nature of the logical languages, and have never suggested that the logical symbols are in any way abbreviations of the English terms to which they more or less roughly correspond. This seems to me the only intellectually defensible position, though it can be difficult for beginners. Although I wish to make the logic as simple as possible, I don’t think it acceptable to mislead students about the nature of the subject. Given this attitude, some might wonder at the use of the pseudo-sentence “!” adapted from Hardegree’s logic text.2 The more traditional method would be to treat “!” as a logical constant having the value False, but since the “!” is here used only in derivations, the method adopted in the text seemed more sensible, and seems intellectually defensible as well. Anyone who disagrees may easily adopt the traditional approach. The advantages of using “!” on either interpretation are chiefly pedagogical, since its use makes more obvious the point at which an indirect derivation is finished, requires the student to cite the contradictory sentences derived explicitly, and provides an appropriate SHOW line for the indirect derivations. Metatheory is generally ignored in the text, being limited to some very informal remarks without proof. Generally the techniques needed for even a rigorous statement of metatheorems are beyond what seems feasible to teach in the one semester course for which this book is designed. Some instructors may wish to use this text for a course which does not go beyond monadic predicate logic. This can be done by skipping Chapters 7 and 11, section 7 of Chapter 9, and section 3 of Chapter 10, and omitting exercises in Chapters 8 and 10 which involve polyadic predicates. As I am a bad proofreader, I am especially grateful to the long-suffering students of my Spring, 1999 logic course, who had

**Gary Hardegree, Symbolic Logic: A First Course, McGraw Hill 1994. Hardegree uses “×” instead of “!”
**

2

iii

Introductory Logic to use a preliminary version of this book that was riddled with errors. Especially helpful in identifying typographical errors were Alan McDaniel, Doug Clouden, Kieshelle Cudjoe, Jason Baxter, Tara Blackman, Frank Georges, Brian Kolstad, Emily Lewis, Liz Peters, Shuomon Sharif, and Brianna Winters. I am also grateful to Gabriel Uzquiano, who used the book in his Fall, 1999 logic course, and found many more typos. Also, John Kwak, my Teaching Assistant for the Fall of 2007 found a staggering number of errors, most of which I hope I have corrected. I am very grateful to him and to all who have helped by pointing out errors. For whatever errors and stupidities remain, I am alone responsible. Correspondence about them should be directed to jbennett@philosophy.rochester.edu John G. Bennett University of Rochester

iv

**Preface to the Student
**

This logic book tries to tell you all that you need to know to master your logic course. In theory you could learn the material of the course without ever going to class. But in practice, skipping class is probably a very bad idea. This book has not been written for the autodidact; rather, it is intended to accompany a course in which crucial points are explained more fully, illustrative examples are given, and student questions are answered. Furthermore, nearly all students learn better if they not only read, but also hear the material explained by a human being. Any course that uses this book will be a hard course. The book and your instructor try to make it as easy as possible to learn logic, but there is no avoiding the fact that logic at this level is a difficult subject. However, there are things you can do to make sure that you master the material. Here are some:

C Work on logic every day for at least a couple of hours.

C

C

C

C

You might be able to get away with working on logic only every other day, but do not expect to do well if you study only once a week or only when exercises are due. Keep up with the material. You cannot cram logic. If you haven’t been doing logic regularly, there is little chance that you can learn enough the night before a test to do well. The material of a logic course is cumulative. If you don’t understand one part, you may not understand the next. Do lots of exercises. You learn logic mostly by doing exercises. There are more exercises in this book than your instructor will require you to hand in, but you should try to do as many of them as possible, even when they are not assigned. Pick up any written work you hand in as soon as it is available. (This includes tests.) You need to get feedback to find out how you are doing. Since the material is cumulative, you can’t do well on the next assignment if you don’t understand the last one. Be sure to understand any mistakes you made on work you handed in and how to avoid them in the future. Ask questions when you don’t understand things or can’t do many of the exercises. If there is something you don’t v

Introductory Logic understand, you need to do something to remedy the situation. Ask your instructor, teaching assistant, or another student who knows the material. Don’t put off your questions any longer than necessary. Remember, the only stupid question is the one that is not asked. Don’t worry if you can’t do one or two of the exercises; some are rather hard, and not all students will be able to do all of the exercises. But if you find yourself unable to do most of the exercises in a given set, you should get some help. The author of this book is not a very good proofreader, so there are likely to be errors in the text. Please send any you find to the author by e-mail at the following address. jbennett@philosophy.rochester.edu

vi

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Chapter 1: Basic Logical Concepts . 11 5: Arguments. . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 2-5: . . 4: Shortcuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3: Truth-functional Connectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix I: Logical Possibility . . . . . . . . . . 11 Exercises 1-5: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4: Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 2-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 3-2: . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 3-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5: Complex Translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Interpretations . . . . 7 Exercises 1-4: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1: Truth . . . . ii Preface to the Student . . . The Rest of this Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii 20 20 26 27 28 32 33 43 45 50 53 53 56 57 61 61 69 . . Syntax and Translation . 14 Definitions for Chapter 1: . . . . . . 3 3: Logical Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Exercises 1-A2 . 2 2: Statements and Sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Table of Contents Preface . . . 14 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Validity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 2-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and Soundness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1: Vocabulary and syntax . . . . . . . . . . v Table of Contents . . . . . Exercises 2-1: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Calculating all Possible Truth Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 3: Truth Functional logic . . . . . . . . . 1: Truth of Sentences of L1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3: Logical relations in L1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix II: Use and Mention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4: Logical Inconsistency and Equivalence . . . . . . . 19 Chapter 2: L1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . 105 6: Derivation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 5-3: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 5: Using Rules Correctly . . . Exercises 5-2: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Derived Rules of Inference for D1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4: Derivation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rules for D1 . . . . . . . . 6: The Deductive System D1 . . . . . . . viii 111 111 117 118 121 121 127 127 132 133 136 136 139 139 139 140 140 140 140 141 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Chapter 5: Derivations II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Exercises 4-4: . . . . Assumption Rules: . . 88 Exercises 4-3: . . . . . . . . 87 3: More Rules of Inference . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 4: Subderivations and two more rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Completed Derivation . . . 102 Exercises 4-5: . . . . . . . . Exercises 3-5: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1: Derived Rules . . . . . Pseudo-inference rule: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 74 76 78 Chapter 4: Derivations I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5: Truth-Functional Logical Properties of English Sentences . . .Introductory Logic Exercises 3-4: . . . . . . . Replacement Rules for D1 . . . . . . 81 2: Getting Started with Derivations . . . Appendix: Knights and Knaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Showing Inconsistency and Equivalence with Derivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Exercises 4-6: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structural Rules . . . . . 3: Replacement Rules: . . . Exercises 5-5 . . . . . . Exercises 5-1: . . . . . . . . . Exercises 5-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basic Rules of Inference . . . . . . . . . . 5: D1 Derivations and English proofs . . . . . . . 81 1: Overview of Derivations . . . 83 Exercises 4-2: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 6-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1: Predicates with more than one place . . . . . Exercises 6-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix: Syntax Rules for L2 . . . . . . . . 3: Small domains with Polyadic Predicates . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 8-2 . . . . . 7: Some additional common idioms of English . . . . . . . . . . . 5: Translation: “All” and its Variants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Exercises 9-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Translating Quantifiers and Polyadic Predicates . . . . . . . . Exercises 8-4: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 6-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 7-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 6-2 . Exercises 6-6 . . . . . . . . and Satisfaction . . . . . Exercises 8-1 . . Exercises 7-1 . . . . . . . . . 3: Confinement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 8: Quantificational Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Logical Relations with Polyadic Predicates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 142 146 147 149 149 153 154 157 158 163 164 168 170 173 174 178 180 182 182 184 186 190 193 196 197 199 201 201 205 206 208 209 212 212 218 Chapter 9: Quantificational Derivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4: Quantifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 6-5 . .Chapter 6: Monadic Quantification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4: Expansion in Finite Domains . . . . Chapter 7: Polyadic Quantification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6: Translation: “At least one” and its variants . . . . . . . . . . . . 1: Names and Predicates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 6-4 . . . . . . Exercises 7-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 1: Instances of quantified sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Open Sentences. . 4: Ambiguities in English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 ix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2: Variables. . . . . . . . 8: Translation in to L2: Complex Sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1: Quantificational logical relations . . . . . . Exercises 7-2 . 3: Interpretations and Small Domains . Exercises 8-3 . . . Exercises 6-7 . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definite Descriptions: . . . . Non-equivalence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Exercises 9-7 . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 221 223 224 227 228 230 230 232 234 237 238 241 New Derivation Rules In Chapter 9: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 2: . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 11-3 . . . Exercises 9-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7: Derivations with Polyadic Predicates . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . 2. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 2: Strategies for Derivations . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 5: Using Rules Correctly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 9-6 . . . . . . . 4: Universal Derivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . 3: Enthymemes . . 243 Quantificational Structural Rule . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consistency.. . . . . . . . Exercises 9-4 . . Exercises 10-3 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 11-4 . . . . . . . .. . . . . Chapter 3 .. . . . . . . . . . .. . 6: Strategy in Quantificational Derivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .Introductory Logic 2: The Universal Exploitation and Existential Introduction rules. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 3: Existential Exploitation . . . . 1: Quantifier Negation . Exercises 10-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 11: Identity .. . Answers to Odd Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Basic Quantificational Rules of Inference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 9-2 . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 10-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Derivations with Identity: . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . Translations Using the Identity Predicate: . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Chapter 10: More Quantificational Derivations . . . . . . . . 3: Showing Invalidity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 11-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . Exercises 11-2 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . x 244 244 247 248 250 251 253 255 255 260 261 265 265 268 269 273 275 275 276 278 . . . . . . . Exercises 9-3 . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 7: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 5: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 8: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 11: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 6: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 297 308 311 312 316 328 340 xi . . . . Chapter 10 . .Chapter 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 9: .

She reads. Socrates is human. “Of course. You are old enough to tie your own shoes. I don’t tie the shoes of those who are old enough to tie their own shoes. “There is something called The One. In this book. Of course. Since this is a good argument. cannot be true. Ellie. “Do you tie your own shoes?” Peter replies. there are simpler and more familiar examples. so you should tie your own shoes. taken strictly and literally. asks.Basic Logical Concepts Chapter 1: Basic Logical Concepts Peter is tying the shoes of his baby brother. its conclusion must be true if its premises are. (Can you figure out why? Can you figure out what he meant to say instead?) Alice is reading a web page that is part of the Mystics-andmystery. you may know that this is a good argument: All humans are mortal. I’m old enough to tie my own shoes. We won’t develop the tools for demonstrating Peter’s inconsistency until Chapter 9. “Will you tie my shoes too.” she thinks.” Peter has spoken carelessly and made inconsistent statements.” Alice notices that it is a consequence of this second sentence that there is only one thing and it is Divine. who has just learned to tie her own shoes and is still having a bit of trouble doing so. Peter?” Peter says.com web site. Therefore. and I do so. Each thing is such that it is identical to The One if and only if The One is divine. What he said. Socrates is mortal. (Can you see why this is a consequence of the web page’s statement?) “That’s a sort of Pantheism. and the tools for dealing with what he probably meant to say instead 1 .” Ellie asks. we will learn about some logical relations and develop tools for dealing with them in a rigorous fashion. “No. His younger sister. Ellie. For instance. Logic deals with these sorts of properties and relations. You are too. It’s good practice. The inconsistency of Peter’s statements and the consequence relation that Alice notices between the statement of the web site and the conclusion that she draws are examples of deductive logical properties and relations. and you should do so.

equivalence. Truth is not knowledge. because not all sentences are true or false. Although everything that is known is true. 1: Truth Logic deals with truth. and only if. Consider the following statement: On July 4. and we shall begin by saying something about it. not everything true is known. It is true that Columbus sailed to the new world in 1492 if Columbus did so in that year. though all statements are. Although philosophers have argued about the nature of truth for centuries. For instance. false otherwise. although no one then knew that it was true.E. just as it is now. that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen. and probably no one ever will know whether that statement is true or false. What is known varies from person to person. it is true that all dogs bark if all dogs do bark. Next we must distinguish statements. The fundamental idea of deductive logic is that statements may have important properties in virtue of their forms.Introductory Logic won’t appear until Chapter 11. And if it is not true. Finally we shall say a word about how we will proceed in the remaining chapters of this book. 3042 B. otherwise. Still. For instance. it was composed of these elements then. This chapter introduces the basic logical concepts we will work with in this course. It was true then. We shall introduce the notion of logical form and use it to explain the fundamental logical relations: consistency. as it is now. from sentences generally.C. which are true and false. it is false.2 inches of rain fell on (what is now) Rochester. for logical purposes we only need to get clear about a few simple and relatively uncontroversial facts about truth. one thousand years ago no one knew that water was composed of hydrogen and oxygen. Probably no one has ever known. The basic idea is very simple: a statement is true if. The most fundamental one is truth. It is false if things are not as it says. from place to place. New York. things are as the statement says they are. and from time to time. 2 . at least 0. There may even be truths that no one will ever know. but truth does not vary in this way. where we will also develop the tools needed to show that Alice’s inference is a good one. and validity.

we shall use the term “statement” for things that are either true or false. So far. Whether something is true is not ordinarily determined by whether people agree about it. One of these two statements must be true. 2: Statements and Sentences Statements are true or false.Basic Logical Concepts then the following statement is true: On July 4. no matter how controversial it may be. In this course. is either true or false.C. like 3 . there was less than 0. even though there are good reasons for believing that there are many truths that cannot be expressed in any sentence of English. Truth may be controversial. 3042 B. though it may make it harder for us to know what is true. Scientists disagree (at the time of this writing) about whether there is a genetic component to homosexuality. English sentences may ask questions or issue orders: Shut the door! Have you shut the door? Only sentences in declarative mood. Nevertheless. and so it will be throughout this book.E. There is at least one gene. but I doubt that anyone will ever know which one. the following statement. or make different statements on different occasions. English sentences need not be declarative sentences. Let's consider some of the ways English sentences may fail to make statements. New York. Controversy cannot rob a statement of truth. all the statements we have considered have been given in sentences. statements cannot be simply identified with sentences of English: some sentences of English make no statements. even though we will make statements using sentences of English. possession of which makes a person more likely to be homosexual. However.2 inches of rain on (what is now) Rochester.

” I may be referring to my dining room table or to the table in my office.Introductory Logic The door is shut.”3 “Now” can be replaced by a date and time. This feature of “now” is pervasive in English. Indexical terms are terms like “I. Bennett. yet?” presupposes. ordinarily we tell which by the circumstances under which I utter the sentence. but is sometimes true and sometimes false. we shall only be concerned with what sentences say directly. “The table is cluttered.” while you would replace “I” by “Wilma S. Other terms in the language may need the circumstances of their utterance to make clear what statement they make. If I should say. “It is now raining” what I say would be true if I say it when it is raining. In this course. We can.” One of these statements may be true and the other false. Occurrences of “I” can be replaced by names. because that would make the examples 3 Or whatever your name is.” whose reference varies on different occasions of use. “I am hungry. English sentences may contain indexical terms or other terms whose reference varies with context. “I am hungry. but false when said other times. and all our sentences that express statements will be declarative sentences. The sentence.” and “now. or suggest statements. and so on. a past tense sentence says what happened before now. insinuate. When I say. If I say.” “here. “I am hungry” is not simply true or false. but it does not make that statement directly. depending on who is uttering it.” “you. Freeblestrom. Freeblestrom. and tensed sentences can be replaced by sentences with the time reference made explicit. if it is not Wilma S. The word “now” also varies similarly. “Have you stopped cutting classes. because of tense: a present tense sentence always says what's happening now. can make statements. and so suggests. at some cost in convenience. that the person to whom it is addressed has been cutting classes. So the English sentence.” I am making a different statement from the one you make when you say. We shall not always be that careful in giving examples of statements in this book. regiment our sentences so that they make a single statement regardless of the circumstances under which they are uttered. 4 . I would replace “I” by “John G. although sentences in other moods can presuppose.

Consider the following sentence. this sentence can’t make a statement. for in that case. If a sentence is too vague to be true or false. To identify a single statement we need an unambiguous sentence.Basic Logical Concepts even more cumbersome and artificial than they will be anyway. A statement can’t say of itself that it is false. But there is no precise line between bald heads and heads that are not bald. Understood one way an ambiguous sentence may be true. for instance: The sentence in the box on page 5 is false. Sc. But you should always imagine that sentences that are supposed to make statements have been appropriately spelled out in this way. for if it is. and for this reason may fail to make a statement. Consequently. which says that it is false. If this sentence makes a statement. There are other ways sentences can fail to make statements. But it can’t be false either. it must be false. if a sentence does that. Ambiguous sentences can be understood in more than one way. An English sentence may be too vague to be definitely true or false. while a man with a full head of hair is not. iv): The duke yet lives that Henry shall depose. some people may have lost just enough hair to put them in the indeterminate area between bald and not bald. the statement is true or false. while understood another. and not true. But it cannot be true. it doesn't make any 5 . since the sentence says that it is false. A man with no hair on his head is certainly bald. consider the following sentence. it may be false. and die a violent death. Any sentence that fails to be true or false fails to make a statement. but can be understood to make either of two. Will Henry depose the duke. But him outlive. Consider a word like “bald”. or the duke depose Henry? The sentence can be read either way. It does not make a single statement. English sentences may be too vague to make a statement. the sentence. English sentences may be ambiguous. it does not make a statement. Henry VI Part II (Act i. uttered by a spirit conjured up by some characters in Shakespeare's play. For instance. though a sentence can. would be true.

and the result is a pair of statements.” if both occurrences of the blank are filled in the same way. (Recall. These two sentences cannot both be true. but we can begin to appreciate the idea through an example. Forms are categories of statements that can be applied without knowing whether the statements are true or false. It is not the case that 641 is a prime number. again. indeed 6 .”) No matter how we fill in the blank indicated by the Greek letter “N. We shall exhibit statements in the course by presenting English sentences which are (or which are imagined to be) free of such problems. statements are either true or false. that by definition statements are true or false. A sentence of English may fail to make a statement. Consider the following statements: 641 is a prime number. ambiguity. Compare the following two statements: January 23. exactly one of them must be true. 2031 is a Thursday. though not all sentences of English make statements. 3: Logical Form We begin with an example. exactly one of them must be true. The pattern exhibited above has two characteristics of a logical form: (1) The pattern itself does not make any statements. indeed. then exactly one of the statements will be true. indexicality.) In summary. These two statements also cannot both be true. vagueness or other factors. There is a general pattern here: (F1) N It is not the case that N (The symbol. 2031 is a Thursday.Introductory Logic statement at all. In fact. or may make different statements on different occasions because of mood. A statement that belongs to a given form is said to be an instance of that form. It is not the case that January 23. pronounced like “fie. We cannot yet give a precise account of logical form. “N” is the Greek letter phi.

”) The same sentence must be used to interpret a particular Greek letter at each of its occurrences. The disease is more widespread than we thought. By assigning to the Greek letter a sentence that makes a statement. We shall call what we get when we interpret a form’s Greek letters as an instance of that form. we never can get an instance where the first two statements are true and the third one is false. the Greek letters are interpreted by sentences that make statements. the third one is also. (The symbol “R” is the Greek letter Psi. Any instance has three statements. If the sample is representative. This form has the following property: whatever interpretation we supply for the Greek letters. and we know that any such pair will have exactly one true sentence. Tawana is vice president. Another example may help: (F2) If N then R. The sample is representative. That is. but these features will be important to understand. 4: Logical Inconsistency and Equivalence 7 . pronounced like “sigh. for instance: If Juan is president then Tawana is vice-president. we get a pair of sentences that makes statements. We have not yet defined the notion of a logical form. N R In this form. Juan is president. But we can get a variety of statements by supplying what we shall call an interpretation for the Greek letter. for each interpretation we will get a pair of sentences. if the first two statements of an instance of the form are true. but the sentences that interpret the different Greek letters may be the same or different. (2) By examining the forms we can find out something about the truth of the statements for all of the infinite number of interpretations we could give.Basic Logical Concepts it doesn’t say anything. then the disease is more widespread than we thought. In this case.

in (F1) above we may substitute the sentence. When a form has this property. It is not the case that 3024 is evenly divisible by 7. in every case one of the statements is true and one is false. Note that the definition of inconsistent statements implies that there is no inconsistent form of which they are instances. Generally. we are speaking of the statements that result when we have made the interpretation. We can use the notion of an inconsistent form to define inconsistency and consistency for statements. A set of statements is inconsistent if and only if it is an instance of an inconsistent form. “3024 is evenly divisible by 7” for the Greek letter “N” and obtain this: (I1) 3024 is evenly divisible by 7. the definition of an inconsistent form is this: A form is inconsistent if and only if there is no interpretation on which all of the statements are true. Note that when we speak of the statements not all being true. For instance. we are not speaking of the sentences we may substitute to make the instance. we get two statements. 8 . These two statements are not both true)you can know this even if you don't know whether 3024 is evenly divisible by 7. Recall (F1) above: (F1) N It is not the case that N Whatever interpretation we may supply. Consequently. A set of statements is consistent if and only if it is not inconsistent.Introductory Logic Logical properties are defined in terms of forms. we say that it is an inconsistent form. Again we begin with an example. we can never find an interpretation that yields two true statements. and as we noted above.

knowing that statements are consistent gives us no logical guarantee at all about their truth values. Here are two statements that form a consistent set of sentences: New York City is in New York State. Equivalence is also defined by forms. the sentences I1 above are not only an instance of (F1) but also of (F3): (F3) N R but an instance of a form that is not inconsistent (like (F3)) need not be consistent. To show them consistent we would have to show that they are not an instance of any inconsistent form. we cannot offer the sort of reason we offered for the first pair’s being consistent. some not. any pair of true sentences is an instance of this form. because they are both true. we may say that if statements are inconsistent. Chicago is in Illinois. all interpretations yield sets of inconsistent statements. New York City is in Illinois. but we are not in a position to show that they are. when statements are equivalent we have a logical guarantee that they have the same truth value. and we are not yet in a position to do that. (Why?) The following statements also form a consistent set.Basic Logical Concepts Since (F1) is an inconsistent form. Speaking casually. some inconsistent. and hence cannot be an instance of any inconsistent form. An instance of an inconsistent form is inconsistent. On the other hand. This notion is also defined in terms of 9 . which is not inconsistent. Chicago is in New York State. For instance. all consistency amounts to is an absence of the logical guarantee that inconsistency supplies. We know that these statements are consistent. But notice that any set of inconsistent statements is an instance of many forms. Intuitively. you have a sort of logical guarantee that they are not all true. Since the statements are both false.

in virtue of the fact that (F4) is an equivalence form. one instance of (F4) is: All cows are mammals. the following statements are equivalent: All logic students work hard. and (2) there is no interpretation on which the statements have different truth values. both statements are true. Here we don't replace the Greek letters by sentences. or “mammal. Two statements are equivalent if and only if the pair of them is an instance of an equivalence form. Two statements are non-equivalent if and only if they are not equivalent. For instance. Another is: All astronauts are males. Consider this example: (F4) All Ns are Rs. In fact. but rather by general terms. A form is an equivalence form if and only if: (1) All its instances consist of exactly two statements. like “cow”. In the first of these examples. both statements have the same truth value. both are false. in the second. Nothing that is a cow fails to be a mammal also. Nothing that is a N fails to be a R also. 10 . Nothing that is an astronaut fails to be a male also. (F4) is an equivalence form.Introductory Logic forms. We define equivalence for statements in terms of equivalence for forms.” For example. but in either case.

and Soundness In Logic. 8. 5. if false. 64 is divisible by 3. Note that (F1). The earth has one natural satellite. If a pair of sentences is an instance of (F3) the sentences are consistent.. We don't need to know whether these sentences are true or false to know that they must have the same truth value. (F1) is inconsistent. 10. Exercises 1-4: Declare the following true or false. If a set of sentences is inconsistent. (F3) is inconsistent. In ordinary English. If a pair of sentences is an instance of (F1) the sentences are inconsistent. 7. The following three sentences are inconsistent: 5 + 3 = 8. Its meaning in modern logic is derived from the second meaning mentioned. The following sentences are equivalent: 64 is a perfect cube (i. such that n3 = 64). designed to convince or persuade. explain briefly why. refer to the forms discussed in the text. “argument” has a special meaning.e. etc. but it is more abstract: 11 . Validity. they form an inconsistent set. 4. 2. Some elephants live in Africa. If two sentences are equivalent.Basic Logical Concepts Nothing that is a logic student fails to work hard. there is an integer. (F4) is inconsistent. all the sentences are false. 3. 6. (F2). an argument may be (among other things) either a quarrel or a stretch of reasoning. (F2) is inconsistent. 1. 9. 5: Arguments. n.

(A1).Introductory Logic An argument is a non-empty set of statements. made of three dots (ˆ). preceded by “ˆ” as in the following example: (A1) If Alonzo was at the party. 12 . We adopt a policy of always presenting the premises (if any) first. an instance of a valid argument form is a valid argument. ˆ Bertha was at the party. N ˆR The argument above. We shall use the “therefore” sign. are called premises. exactly one of which is designated the conclusion. but premises are optional. and then the conclusion. As you expect. and the other two statements are premises. validity is defined in terms of forms: An argument form is valid if and only if it has no interpretation on which all the premises (if any) are true and the conclusion is false. if any. In presenting arguments. Here. As you would expect. we must settle on a standard way of designating the conclusion. “Bertha was at the party” is the conclusion. Bertha was at the party. The most important logical property arguments may have is validity. Notice that according to this definition an argument must have exactly one conclusion. is an instance of this form. An example of a valid argument form can be obtained by modifying form (F2) mentioned earlier so as to designate the last statement as a conclusion: If N then R. as indicated by this definition: A valid argument is an argument that is an instance of a valid argument form. Alonzo was at the party. The other statements.

13 . If an argument is invalid. has no instances with true premises and false conclusions. it is easy to construct sound arguments for any true statement. A sound argument must have a true conclusion (why?) even though the definition does not say that it does. then the argument must have no instances where the conclusion is false. because no matter what statement-making sentence we use to replace N. An argument is sound if and only if it is valid and has true premises. and from the definition. As we will learn later. An argument is unsound if and only if it is not sound. Naturally. If we have a valid argument. There is a special term for arguments that are valid and have all their premises (if any) true: they are said to be sound. and that form. we have no logical guarantee at all about the conclusion. The validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion. we must use arguments that satisfy criteria that go beyond mere soundness. Above we pointed out that an argument need not have any premises. the conclusion of the argument is true. This is a valid argument form. When we use arguments to learn things or to show to others that statements are true. as we have noted. the conclusion is also. If the premises of a valid argument are not true. we have a logical guarantee that if the premises are true.Basic Logical Concepts An invalid argument is an argument that is not valid. that fact tells us nothing at all about the truth values of its premises and conclusion: any of them could be either true or false. if there are no premises. This guarantee comes from the fact that the argument is an instance of a valid logical form. being valid. What is a valid argument with no premises like? It must be an instance of a valid argument form. for this the argument must also have true premises. it may be either true or false. we have a special interest in valid arguments with true premises. Here is an example of a valid argument form with no premises: ˆ Either N or it is not the case that N.

3. A valid argument may have false premises. not of logic. modern logic uses artificial languages. or Tagalog. The Rest of this Book Modern logic uses artificial rather than natural languages. 5. Although this is not always correct (and we shall point out some problems with it). Exercises 1-5: Declare the following true or false. The artificial languages can be specified rigorously. Any argument with true premises and a true conclusion is valid. The artificial languages we will study provide the forms of statements. A sound argument may have a false conclusion. A valid argument may have a false conclusion. 6. Any argument with true premises and a false conclusion is invalid. explain why. we shall assume that this procedure does a good enough job for us to understand the logic of natural language sentences. We have not done so because this is difficult to do for natural languages like English. 6. we give interpretations to get instances. Chinese. a technique developed by Gottlob Frege (1848-1925). 1. We shall assume that the logical properties of the artificial language sentences that translate English sentences are approximately the same as the logical properties of the statements made by the English sentences they translate. You will have noticed that we have still not defined precisely what a form is. and we will learn how to use them and how to translate between English and the various artificial languages we discuss. A sound argument may have false premises. 2. we will not discuss them further. a German mathematician. 14 . 4.Introductory Logic But as these other criteria are part of epistemology. These artificial languages are free of most of the problems connecting English sentences with statements that we discussed in Section 2 of this chapter. Instead. if false. Hindi.

and (2) there is no interpretation on which the statements have different truth values. The other statements. A set of statements is consistent if and only if it is not inconsistent. A valid argument is an argument that is an instance of a valid argument form. Two statements are non-equivalent if and only if they are not equivalent. Appendix I: Logical Possibility In this chapter we have defined validity using the notion of a form. An invalid argument is an argument that is not an instance of any valid argument form. Two statements are equivalent if and only if the pair of them is an instance of an equivalence form. exactly one of which is designated the conclusion. A form is an equivalence form if and only if: (1) All its instances consist of exactly two statements. An argument is unsound if and only if it is not sound. are called premises. An argument form is valid if and only if there is on interpretation on which all the premises (if any) are true and the conclusion is false. An argument is sound if and only if it is valid and has true premises. if any. You may have heard the following definition of validity: 15 .Basic Logical Concepts Definitions for Chapter 1: A form is inconsistent if and only if there is no interpretation on which all its statements are true. An argument is a non-empty set of statements. A set of statements is inconsistent if and only if it is an instance of some inconsistent statement form.

This definition is not incorrect. Therefore. consider the following argument: Alpha Centuri is more than 4 light years away from earth.Introductory Logic An argument is valid if and only if it is impossible that the premises should be true while the conclusion is false. Apparently something is physically impossible if it is inconsistent with the laws of nature. Hence physics tells us that it is impossible for the premise of the argument above to be true while the conclusion is false. We shall not stop to determine whether the philosophers in question are correct. Therefore. the argument above is not a valid argument. the argument is not valid. and hence nothing that is a human being can be identical with anything that is a tomato. 2000. Still. but it is not very helpful. for it is supposed that even if the laws of nature were different than they are. and physical impossibility is not the sort of impossibility we are talking about in the definition of validity. Bennett was a human being on July 1. Something that is a human being has a different essence from anything that is a tomato. or even whether what they 16 . because the notion of possibility is not sufficiently clear. it may be claimed. no signal can reach Alpha Centuri from earth in less than four years. for the definition of validity this is not the correct notion of possibility. Some philosophers would say that this is a mere physical impossibility. Nevertheless. Bennett was not a tomato on July 2. John G. This is supposed to be not merely physically impossible. However. 2000. According to these philosophers. it would still be impossible for a person to become a tomato. Many philosophers argue that it is impossible for a human being to turn into a tomato. For instance. Physics tells us that it is impossible for any signal to travel faster than light. Physical possibility is not the only sort of possibility that differs from logical possibility. Consider the following argument: John G. it is impossible for the premise of the above argument to be true if the conclusion is false.

If we take a sentence that makes a statement and put “it is not the case that” immediately in front of it. To define validity in terms of consistency. it is called)is not relevant to defining validity. that is to say. When a letter. phrase. we must have the notion of the negation of a statement. then? Logical possibility is the answer. What sort of possibility might be relevant to validity. I was acquainted with the following riddle: Railroad crossing: Watch out for the cars! Can you spell it without any R’s? Those of us who had heard the riddle before would answer. if and only if the premises and the negation of the conclusion form an inconsistent set. but 17 .’” This riddle turns on what is called a use-mention ambiguity. rather it is being exhibited so it can be talked about. rather the relevant type of possibility must be explained using the logical concepts. sentence. We cannot clearly explain the logical notions using the concept of possibility. For instance. word. we get a sentence that makes a statement that is the negation of the original statement. the word “it” seems to be used in the ordinary way to talk about the previous two lines. it is not being used with its usual meaning. or other bit of language is mentioned. The upshot of this discussion is that while it is true in a sense that it is impossible for the premises of a valid argument to be true while the conclusion is false. Appendix II: Use and Mention When I was young. in the riddle above. “Yes: I-T spells ‘it. the sort of possibility involved)logical possibility)must be explained using the logical notions we have explained in this chapter. but what is logical possibility? Logical possibility is just consistency as we have defined it in this chapter. We merely observe that the sort of possibility involved)metaphysical possibility. This definition is equivalent to the one given above in the chapter. An argument is valid if and only if the premises together with the negation of the conclusion are logically impossible.Basic Logical Concepts say makes sense.

in the following two sentences. But the word is also being mentioned at the same time. In American English. but is being mentioned (i. we use quotation marks to indicate that the word “toast” is being mentioned in the first sentence. Consider this sentence: Barbarossa was so-called because of his red hair. you know that it is not being asserted by the author. in other words that the riddle is asking whether the word “it” can be spelled without using the letter “R. Since we are trying to be precise in talking about languages. the word “Barbarossa” is being used to refer to Frederick I. Holy Roman Emperor from 1152 to 1190. As with everything else in English. so we need to settle on a standard way of distinguishing use and mention. “Toast” has five letters. One complication is that sometimes it is possible to both use and mention a word at the same time. When you see text displayed like this. talked about). the standard way of marking that a bit of text is being mentioned rather than used is to surround it with quotation marks. there are complications to the use-mention distinction. it is contributing its ordinary meaning to the sentence and not (ordinarily) referring to itself. Another way of indicating that a bit of text is being mentioned rather than used is to display it indented and separated from ordinary text with blank space.” When a bit of text is used. For example.Introductory Logic the answer assumes “it” is being mentioned.. In this sentence. thus: This is sample text. You can see this by considering that the sentence above means roughly the same as the following: Barbarossa was called “Barbarossa” because of his red 18 . we don’t want to be tripped up by the sort of use-mention ambiguity that riddle depends on. Whole wheat toast with butter and honey is delicious. the absence of such marks indicates that the word is being used in the second sentence.e.

5. 4. 7. The sign said. that is. 1546). The sign says that no refunds will be given. Khayr al-Din (d. My mailbox has four letters. 11. Kiss has more than one meaning. Where a word is being both used and mentioned. the one most likely to make the sentence true. Smith and Jones translated the same text from Sanskrit to English. Send has four letters. Smith where Jones had had had had had had had had had had the instructors approval. 19 . 10. the gn as in gnu. 2. His kiss meant nothing to her. Phtholognyrrh is pronounced the same as turner. Frederick Barbarossa shares the name Barbarossa with a Barbary pirate of the sixteenth century. The German word for snow is monosyllabic. In case more than one answer is possible.Basic Logical Concepts hair. the phth as in phthisis. punctuate the following to indicate which bits of text are being mentioned. Exercises 1-A2 Where appropriate. 6.] 12. Nova Scotia was named that by British settlers. choose the most plausible one. it is not put in quotation marks. 8. the yrrh as in myrrh. not just quotation marks. the olo as in colonel. Keep Off the Grass. Schnee is the German word for snow. 1. 3. [Here all punctuation except the final period has been removed from the last sentence. 9.

but it is handy to have an unlimited stock of sentence letters around. and punctuation. D. C.. B.. We are going to learn a new. The language has one unary connective and four binary sentence connectives. Z. The meanings of the logical terms in the language will then be explained. In order for the language to make statements it must be interpreted. Syntax and Translation In Chapter 1. letters. Here are some of them. 1: Vocabulary and syntax The symbols of L1 include sentences.. which we call L1. Most of the time we will not use the subscripted sentence letters.. These are upper case Roman letters. we saw how sentences of natural languages may not unambiguously make a single statement. and finally we will learn how to translate between English and L1. symbolic language.Y. There are three types of symbols.. The first thing to do is to become acquainted with the symbols that appear in the language)its basic vocabulary. in what we shall declare to be alphabetical order: A. connectives. since you never know how many you may need. Modern logic deals with this by inventing artificial languages in which the sentences can be guaranteed by the rules of construction to make unambiguous statements. We begin with the vocabulary and the rules by which basic symbols are combined to make sentences)the syntax. First there are sentence letters. Next we have five sentence connectives. The unary connective is the tilde: ~ 20 . so we shall explain what an interpretation is.Introductory Logic Chapter 2: L1.. B1. This chapter introduces the simplest symbolic language. a language adequate for truth-functional logic. A1.. with or without Arabic numeral subscripts.

If N and R are sentences. One of the advantages of the artificial languages used by logicians is that their syntax can be exactly specified by a set of fairly simple rules. Our language. The vocabulary of a language)the basic symbols)must be combined to produce sentences. Rule 1 guarantees that all of the following are sentences: A Q M27 X234395 But it does not provide for the following to be sentences (why not?): Å Dx g Rule 2 is more complex than rule 1: 2. “N. Here is the first syntax rule of L1: 1. has just three rules. then so are ~N (M & R) (N w R) (M ÷ R) and (N ø R) The first complexity is the use of the Greek letters. (Phi.” 21 . L1. though one of them has five parts. The rules that specify how the symbols may be combined are the language’s syntax.L1: Syntax and Translation and the binary connectives are the ampersand: & the wedge: w the arrow: ÷ the double arrow: ø There are two official punctuation marks: the left parenthesis: ( the right parenthesis: ) That's all the vocabulary of L1. A sentence letter standing alone is a sentence.

Rule 2 implies that since “A” and “B32” are sentences of L1 (by Rule 1). These Greek letters are not part of the L1. though simple. Rule 2 can be used over and over again on the sentences it has provided for.4 Any of these Greek letters stands for any sentence of L1. since “A” and “B” are sentences. Instead they are part of the language we use to talk about L1)ordinary English.” and Psi. 22 4 . For instance. So. although we could say that some sequences of symbols definitely are sentences. One difficulty arises because of all the parentheses the complex Technically. for example. the following are also sentences: ~A (B32 6 A) (A & B32) and so forth. that is. The Greek letters we are using are called metalinguistic variables. nothing is a sentence unless these rules provide that it is. Because of Rule 3. by Rule 2. “R” pronounced like “sigh”). That’s all. can be tricky to use. the following will also be a sentence: ((A & B) ø (~A w (B ÷ A))) There is one more rule of the syntax of L1: 3. the following are not sentences: g W&R&T ÷A M÷÷B The syntax rules of L1. But now we can use Rule 2 again and see that the following is also a sentence: (~A w (B ÷ A)) and similarly. we could not know that any sequence failed to be a sentence. so are “~A” and “(B 6 A)”.Introductory Logic pronounced “fie. the language used to talk about another language is called its metalanguage. This is a very important rule! Without it. as we noted above. extended by some special terms that we will discuss when they are needed.

only the second one is a sentence. ((A & B)) ø (A w (B ÷ A)) 0 12 10 Not a sentence! (0 reached before end. If you reach the end of the sequence of symbols with a value other than 0. The other two have errors in the placement of parentheses. Start with a value of 0 and proceed through any putative sentence from left to right. Using this checking procedure on the three putative sentences above we get: ((A & B) ø (A w (B ÷ A)) 0 12 1 2 3 21 Not a sentence! (Not 0 at end. even though the parentheses are misplaced: 23 . it won't find any problem with this sequence of symbols.) ((A & B) ø (A w (B ÷ A))) 0 12 1 2 3 210 No problem found. or if you reach the value 0 before reaching the end of the sequence of symbols.) This checking procedure cannot find all possible problems with parentheses. for instance. adding the values of parentheses as you go. the symbols do not make a sentence of L1. according to the rules we have given. For instance can you easily tell which of the following is a sentence of L1? ((A & B) ø (A w (B ÷ A)) ((A & B) ø (A w (B ÷ A))) ((A & B)) ø (A w (B ÷ A)) Actually.L1: Syntax and Translation sentences contain. There is a simple checking procedure that can help you find some errors with parentheses: Give a left parenthesis a value of +1 and a right parenthesis a value of -1.

the checking procedure can be helpful in sorting out parentheses. We can make things still easier by adopting a couple of informal syntax conventions. Sentences of L1 are built up out of smaller sentences. Let us construct a parse tree for our example sentence: ((A & B) ø (~A w (B 6 A))) 24 . and that any matching pair of parentheses may be replaced by brackets(“[” and “]”). In L1. will only work on official sentences. and so forth. especially cases where one parenthesis is missing. However. unofficial sentences must have outermost parentheses replaced (if they were dropped) and brackets changed to parentheses before using the checking procedure. which in turn are built of smaller sentences. Note that the checking procedure. but the unofficial versions of the sentences above are obviously easier for humans to read and understand. so we will not do so. We are not modifying our official syntax rules: they remain rules 1-3 above. Here are some samples of the official and unofficial ways of writing sentences: Official Sentence An Unofficial Version (F ÷ M) F÷M ((A & B) ø (A w (B ÷ A))) (A & B) ø [A w (B 6 A)] ((P ÷ (Q ÷ R)) ÷ ((P ÷ Q) ÷(P ÷ R))) [P ÷ (Q ÷ R)] ÷ [(P ÷ Q) ÷ (P ÷ R)] Incorporating these conventions into our syntax would make our syntax rules much more complicated. The idea of a parse tree is much easier to understand than to explain. We agree that we may drop the outermost parentheses on any sentence. given above. We do such an analysis with what we shall call a parse tree. the atomic sentences are all sentence letters. But we are allowing ourselves some unofficial shortcuts. those that are not built up out of any smaller sentences. Non-atomic sentences can be analyzed into the parts that make them up.Introductory Logic ((A & B) ø (A) w (B ÷ A)) 012 1 21 2 10 No problem found. The smallest sentences. It often finds syntax errors that one might miss. are called atomic sentences.

The main connective of a sentence of L1 is the connective involved in the last use of Rule 1 or 2 at the top of the parse tree.5 Each vertical line below a non-atomic formula points to the connective attached to the sentence or sentences on the line below to make the sentence above it. We will be referring to it often in what follows. an atomic sentence has no main connective. Obviously. but the proof is beyond the scope of this course. showing which connective was used to put it together: ((A & B) ø (~A w (B ÷ A))) (A & B) (~A w (B ÷ A)) We complete the parse tree by repeating the process for each of the component sentences until we have reached all the atomic sentences that make up the sentence: ((A & B) ø (~A w (B ÷ A))) | (A & B) | A B (~A w (B ÷ A)) | ~A | A B (B ÷ A) | A The parse tree for a sentence shows how the sentence was built up from atomic sentences using Rule 2 of the syntax for L1. It can be proved mathematically that there is only one parse tree for any sentence formed in accord with Rules 1-3. But any non-atomic sentence does. 25 5 . and the main connective is important determinant of the logical properties of a sentence. Note that if an official sentence begins with a tilde. We can explain the main connective of a sentence of L1 using the parse tree.L1: Syntax and Translation First we break it into the two parts from which it is made. This is the connective that should be pointed to by the vertical line immediately below the top level.

it is not any kind of sentence. make a parse tree. If the difference between the number of occurrences of binary connectives and left parentheses is not 0 or 1. If you can make a parse tree correctly from the sequence of symbols. Replace the outermost parentheses to get something that might be an official sentence. it is an unofficial sentence. First replace all square brackets by parentheses. The main connective is the first binary connective one encounters when the count is at 1. If the number is the same it is an official sentence. explain why not. Exercises 2-1: Which of the following is an official sentence? Which an unofficial sentence? For those that are official or unofficial sentences. so this procedure may give the wrong answer.Introductory Logic that is the main connective. If there is one fewer left parenthesis than occurrences of binary connectives. then check to see that every symbol is a part of the vocabulary of L1. If it does not. If you have not yet determined whether or not the sequence is a sentence. Next check to see whether the number of left parentheses is the same as the number of occurrences of binary connectives. indicate the main connective and produce a complete parse tree. In cases where it is not obvious whether a sequence of symbols is a sentence or not. For those that are not. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 26 A ÷ (B w C) B ø ~(C w D) (N w M) & (P ø (Q ÷ R) (X w Y) w (C & D) ø (B w C) ~(A w B) ø ~(A) ~~~(A ÷ ~~Q) (p w q) . the checking procedure that we used before to find incorrect uses of parentheses can be used to find the main connective of a sentence. there is no main connective. here is a procedure that will give a definitive answer. if it is a sentence at all. provided the sequence of symbols is a sentence. if it is a sentence at all. it is a sentence. using the procedure for checking parentheses to identify the main connective of each sequence of symbols you obtain. If the sequence of symbols is not a sentence.

Lauren excels at math. Here is a sample partial interpretation: A: G: L: P: Q: Alonzo is a logic student. To indicate which statements sentence letters make is to provide an interpretation of L1. we can explain the statements made by each of the sentence letters conveniently without worrying about all the sentence letters we are not using on that occasion. followed by a sentence of English which makes a statement. Since on any occasion. each item of which consists of a sentence letter. Gertrude is a logic student. this would be very inconvenient. as you can imagine. we shall want only a few of the sentence letters. followed by a colon. So we shall adopt the other alternative of providing partial interpretations each time we wish to use L1. 27 . Here is another partial interpretation: A: B: G: L: Aardvarks eat ants. As you may have guessed. We present an interpretation by presenting a list. However. Plums are delicious. Brenda studies logic. sentence letters are used to make statements. One would be to assign all the sentences of the language statements once and for all)this would be to provide one complete interpretation. Logic is a hard subject.L1: Syntax and Translation 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 (N & R) ((~P ÷ R) & S) w T -(S w T) [P ÷ (Q & R)] ÷ [(P ÷ Q) & (P ÷ R)] {S ÷ T} ÷ [Q & (R ÷ T)] (([P ÷ Q] w R)) & (S ø T) ~(S & T) ø [(P & Q) w ((S ÷ T) w M)] 2: Interpretations Sentence letters are used to make statements. Quadrupeds have legs. Geometry is studied in high school. since there are so many sentences of L1. In providing interpretations for L1 we could adopt either of two strategies.

Since we will be talking only about partial interpretation in this book. L1 gets its interest from the connectives and the way that complex sentences are built up from simple ones using them. A connective that has this property is called negation. Because all of the connectives in L1 are truth functional. All the connectives in L1 are truth functional connectives.” and putting a tilde in front of a symbolic sentence is much like putting “it is not the case that” in from of an English sentence. we can illustrate this idea by discussing each of the connectives in turn. we will drop the word “partial” and speak only of interpretations. otherwise it is false. it would not be a very interesting language. if we only had sentence letters in L1. and sentences of the forms N and ~N are said to be negations of each other. There is nothing more to the meaning of the tilde than this. 3: Truth-functional Connectives The connectives in L1 are truth-functional. Of course.Introductory Logic We choose an interpretation on any occasion that enables us to say what we wish to say using L1. The meaning of the tilde can be given by this rule: A sentence of the form ~N is true if N is false. The tilde is somewhat like the English expression. Thus. suppose we have this interpretation:6 A: Aardvarks eat ants. 28 6 . “it is not the case that. A method of compounding sentences is truth functional if and only if the truth of a sentence compounded by that method depends only on the truth or falsity of the component sentences of which it is compounded. The tilde creates a negation of a sentence.

the first two columns contain all the possible combinations of truth values that N and R might have. The ampersand creates the conjunction of two sentences. A sentence connective that works this way is called conjunction. or a sentence having such a connective as its main connective. phrases. We can present the rule about the meaning of ampersand more perspicuously in a truth table: N T T F F R (N & R) T F T F T F F F In this table.7 and a sentence of the form (N & R) is said to be the conjunction of N and R. N and R are said to be conjuncts. or clauses. this last sentence is not a very good sentence of English. a conjunction is a sentence connective with the meaning of ampersand.” in which case. and the third column presents the corresponding values of their conjunction. In logic. on the interpretation above. Grammatically. we shall use it in the logical sense. We could translate “~A” as “It is not the case that aardvarks eat ants.L1: Syntax and Translation Then the sentence “~A” makes the negation of the statement that aardvarks eat ants. Whenever we use the term “conjunction” in this book. a conjunction is a word that joins or connects words. 29 7 . “grammatical conjunction. The meaning of ampersand is given by this rule: A sentence of the form (N & R) is true if both N and R are true. we mean the grammatical sense. unless we say.” Of course. This use of the term “conjunction” must be distinguished from the grammatical use. and false otherwise. but it does convey exactly what “~A” means.

we can translate “A w C” into English as “Aardvarks eat ants or cows eat grass. Using the interpretation above. N and R are said to be disjuncts. the English sentence is true when at least one of its component sentences is and false otherwise. In saying that the wedge corresponds to the English “or” we are assuming that the English word is being used in its inclusive sense. The wedge creates the disjunction of two sentences. however. The 30 . The meaning of wedge is given by this rule: A sentence of the form (N w R) is true if at least one of N and R is true. The English “and” does not always mean exactly the same as “&”. we can translate “A & C” into English as “Aardvarks eat ants and cows eat grass. Using the following interpretation: A: Aardvarks eat ants. “Aardvarks eat ants or cows eat grass. we will discuss complications later. we can present the rule about the meaning of wedge more perspicuously in a truth table: N T T F F R (N w R) T F T F T T T F The “w” works something like the English word “or” in some of its uses.” is true.” Just like the sentence of L1. so that the sentence. As with ampersand. A sentence connective that works this way is called disjunction. and a sentence of the form (N w R) is said to be the disjunction of N and R. and false otherwise.” Just like the sentence of L1.Introductory Logic The “&” works something like the English word “and” in some of its uses. C: Cows eat grass. the English sentence is true when both of its component sentences are and false otherwise.

31 . “Either aardvarks don’t eat ants or cows eat grass.” Note that the arrow always goes between its antecedent and consequent.. C: Cows eat grass. then. we shall generally translate “÷” with the English “if . A more accurate translation into English would be. we can translate “A÷ C” into English as “If aardvarks eat ants then cows eat grass. and between antecedent and consequent a “then” may appear.” Using the following interpretation: A: Aardvarks eat ants. The arrow expresses the truth-functional conditional. As before. N is said to be the antecedent of the conditional and R is said to be the consequent of it. The meaning of arrow is given by this rule: A sentence of the form (N ÷ R) is true if either N is false or R is true (or both). then. It is false only if N is true and R is false. we can present the rule about the meaning of arrow more perspicuously in a truth table: N T T F F R (N ÷ R) T F T F T F T T The “÷” is something like the English “if .. and a sentence of the form (N ÷ R) is said to be a conditional.. we will discuss later some of the apparent differences between the arrow and “if” in English.L1: Syntax and Translation English “or” also has an exclusive sense. or just a conditional. we will discuss that sense later. “if” precedes its antecedent..” This is only an approximation. A sentence connective that works this way is called a material conditional. whereas in English.” nevertheless.

” As with “÷” and “if” this is only very approximately accurate. and a sentence of the form (N ø R) is said to be a biconditional.” You can see why we would prefer to stick with the “if and only if” translation. As above. or it’s neither true that aardvarks eat ants nor true that cows eat grass. “either it’s both true that aardvarks eat ants and that cows eat grass. a more accurate translation would be. The meaning of double arrow is given by this rule: A sentence of the form (N ø R) is true if both N and R have the same truth value. “N ø R” turns out to be equivalent to the conjunction of “N ÷ R” and “R÷ N”. we can translate “A ø C” into English as “Aardvarks eat ants if and only if cows eat grass. Exercises 2-3 Using the interpretation given. The double arrow turns out to be equivalent to two conditionals. it is false otherwise. that is. Using the interpretation above. we can present the rule about the meaning of double arrow more perspicuously in a truth table: N T T F F R T F T F (N ø R) T F F T The “ø” works something like the English “if and only if” in some of its uses. 32 . translate each of the following into our symbolic language.Introductory Logic The double arrow creates biconditionals. A sentence connective that works this way is called the biconditional.

we always seek an interpretation that allows us to represent as much logical structure as possible in L1. translate each of the following into English. 33 . we try to understand what a sentence in one language (English or L1) is saying. 9 10 11 12 13 14 B÷A BøA ~A & ~B CwB ~C ÷ B ~~B 4: Translation The basic ideas in translation are easy. Either it is not the case that Alonzo studies logic or it is not the case that Bertha studies logic. first: A: It is not the case that Wakili played in the NBA. If it is not the case that cows are mammals then it is not the case that cows give milk. Using the interpretation above. For instance. Cows give milk. If cows are mammals. and then to say that same thing. It is not the case that Alonzo studies logic. then it is not the case that Alonzo studies logic. compare these two interpretations. in another language (L1 or English). any translation to or from L1 requires an interpretation. Alonzo studies logic and Bertha studies logic. as nearly as possible. then cows give milk. sentences of L1 don't say anything at all. In translating. Either Alonzo studies logic or Bertha studies logic. Cows are mammals. without one. If Bertha studies logic. Naturally. When we select an interpretation for translation from English into L1.L1: Syntax and Translation A: B: C: M: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Alonzo studies logic Bertha studies logic. Cows give milk if and only if cows are mammals.

C: Francisco studies logic. The first interpretation is unsuitable. given the following interpretation. because it does not help to make clear all the logical structure of the sentences. and while you may not realize how very complex the English language is. B: Rajib studies logic. Translating between English and L1 cannot be a mechanical process: while L1 is a simple language. Consequently. We cannot represent S2 as a conjunction of two sentences. we cannot suppose that this means the same as Alonzo is a lover and Bertha is a lover. second: A: Wakili played in the NBA. A: Alonzo is a logic student. Let's see one example of the complexity of English.” However. as the first sentence does. Consider this sentence: (S1) Alonzo and Bertha are logic students. you can easily translate S1 into L1 thus: 34 . you already know English. you can see that S1 can be treated as a conjunction and translated using “&. if we consider this sentence: (S2) Alonzo and Bertha are lovers. Since you know that this sentence means the same as Alonzo is a logic student and Bertha is a logic student. because the latter sentence does not say that Alonzo and Bertha love each other. English is not. B: Bertha is a logic student. you have mastered it well enough to translate between it and L1. though we can represent S1 that way.Introductory Logic B: Rajib and Francisco study logic. Fortunately.

8 The moral of this is that we should not look for mechanical ways of translating English into L1. If it is made true simply by two other sentences’ being true. We can tell without concerning ourselves about the meaning of the sentence that “A & B” is a conjunction. we may understand it as a conjunction. and hence that the latter may translate “~A” as well as the former. Later in this book. 35 8 . a more complicated language. All cows are not purple. and might be interpreted to mean the same as Every cow is some color other than purple. You can't always form the negation of an English sentence by inserting “not” into it.” but this can be awkward. So far we have been translating “~” as “it is not the case that. we will be able to represent the logical structure of statements like S2. The second of the sentences is ambiguous. when we learn L2. otherwise not. we must understand it. but the presence of “and” in an English sentence does not always indicate that the sentence is a conjunction. The following sentences do not mean the same: It is not the case that all cows are purple.L1: Syntax and Translation A&B but no interpretation will allow us to say that conjunction is a translation of S2. You can recognize that It is not the case that Alonzo studies logic. However. means the same as Alonzo does not study logic. To tell whether an English sentence is a conjunction. Negation can be complicated in English. “not” in English is somewhat trickier than “~” in L1.

” and “We visited Edinburgh. We have so far considered English sentences using the word "and" to express conjunction. You must not wear a tie to the party. and always has the same meaning.” The English “and” has some complexities connected with tense. the following do not mean the same: It is not the case that you must wear a tie to the party. L1 is simple.” because this conjunction could be true if the two events happened at different times. For instance.” The latter conjunction says nothing about the order of visits. English is complicated.Introductory Logic which certainly does not mean the same as the first sentence. Alonzo studied logic and played football. Or again. you already know English. means the same as Alonzo studied logic and Alonzo played football. We visited London and then Edinburgh while we were seeing it. here are some that can at least sometimes be used to express logical conjunction: 36 . Conjunction can also be expressed using other English words. If that is so. then it is not a mere The first sentence seems to say that Stromboli was erupting conjunction of “We saw Stromboli” and “Stromboli was erupting. and hence is not a mere conjunction of “We visited London. The second sentence says that our visit to Edinburgh occurred after our visit to London. the same is true of a compound predicate. We have seen that a sentence with a compound subject may sometimes mean the same as the conjunction of two sentences. Consider the following sentences: We saw Stromboli and it was erupting. fortunately. Conjunction may be expressed in English in a variety of ways. These complexities do not arise with L1: in that language the tilde always appears in front of the sentence. and hence can be translated using “&.

” 37 9 . The English word “or” has both an inclusive and an exclusive sense. but it does occur. the sense in which it means the same as “on the contrary. However. and however moreover though whereas None of these words means exactly the same as “and. The exclusive “or” is rare in English. if I say. N or [exclusive] R means the same as N or [inclusive] R but not both A glance in a good dictionary will reveal several quite different senses in which “but” may be used as a grammatical conjunction. For instance. it joins two sentences to make a new sentence which is true if and only if exactly one of the two component sentences is true. it is used to join two sentences to make a third which is true if either or both of the original sentences is true.L1: Syntax and Translation although but9 even though furthermore both . “on the contrary.” However. “You may have ice cream or cake. That is why they express conjunction and can be translated using “&. We have no separate connective in L1 for the exclusive “or.. The two senses of “or” differ only when both component sentences are true: in that case the inclusive “or” makes a true sentence.. In the exclusive sense. In its inclusive sense it means the same as wedge. both “and” and “but” can be used to join two sentences to create a third that is true if and only if both the component sentences are true. all uses of “or” will be inclusive unless clearly indicated as exclusive. in this book. that is. only one of these expresses logical conjunction.” The wedge translates “or” only in its inclusive sense. “but” is appropriately used only when there is some contrast between what precedes and what follows it.” For instance. In its exclusive sense. the exclusive “or” a false one. since it means something like.” I should not be understood to have said that you may have both.” because none is needed.

” The translation of arrow as “if . Whatever you think about the Kennedy assassination.” so logicians use it. The king. then” is only approximate. if the ancient accounts are correct.. then. 38 .. The arrow can approximate “if .Introductory Logic and hence may be translated into L1 as (N w R) & ~(N & R) The arrow approximates the English “if . If you are a conspiracy theorist. and no one else did. All of the following mean the same: If the ancient accounts are correct. you will agree that this is true. you might hold that this is true. On occasion we will point out situations where the approximation is not entirely satisfactory. If Oswald had not shot Kennedy. For instance. then. then” only in some of its uses. someone else would have. Hence it can be translated using the arrow. The king came to the battle unprepared. In English. It could only be false if Oswald did not shoot Kennedy and no one else did either. if the ancient accounts are correct.. But we both may recognize that Oswald did shoot Kennedy. Counter-factual conditionals are those with false antecedents.. Nevertheless. The truth of the counter-factual does not depend solely on the truth or falsity of its components. the arrow is not a bad approximation of “if . while I hold that it is false. someone else did. Contrast the sentence above with If Oswald did not shoot Kennedy. such as.. because the English “if . then” is generally not truth functional. a clause beginning with “if” may come anywhere in the sentence.. the king came to the battle unprepared. the counter-factual conditional is definitely not truth functional and cannot be approximated by any truth-functional connective.. came to the battle unprepared.

but his excuse was hardly credible. if hardly credible.” Certain English words deserve special discussion.L1: Syntax and Translation In English. all of the above sentences would be translated by the sentence. which means almost the same as His excuse was creative.” although this latter wording is not very good style... and to say “neither . consider: His excuse was creative.” “Neither” in English means “not either”. rather than a conditional. One such is “neither . which you should be able to recognize as a conjunction and translate using “&. In L1 there is no such marker.” in which case it is used to make a conjunction. K: The king came to the battle unprepared.. Thus 39 ... A÷K There are several other words in English that can express approximately the same idea as the English “if” and which can also generally be translated by the arrow. nor” is to say “it is not the case that either .. Hence using the following interpretation. Occasionally the English “if” is used to mean “even if.. the word “if” marks the clause which is the antecedent of the conditional.. the antecedent must always come to the left of the arrow. For instance.” but they are close enough that we will translate all of them by arrow. nor.. A: The ancient accounts are correct. or . Here are some: provided that on condition that in case in the event that on the assumption that Each of these has a slightly different meaning from “if.

“Only if” 40 . ~(D w R) As we shall show in the next chapter. using the indicated interpretation.” although this may seem incorrect. In fact. and hence the sentence representing the clause beginning with “unless” must always come to the left of the arrow. R: The Republican candidate is free of scandal. regardless of where it occurs in the English sentence. though it would be if “if” meant exactly what “÷” means. R: It rains on Sunday. and hence must be translated. Another interesting word is “unless. Hence it would not be incorrect to translate “unless” using “w. means the same as We will have the picnic if it does not rain on Sunday. this is equivalent to ~D & ~R which is an equally good translation. “Only if” is another expression that we can translate. thus: P: We will have the picnic on Sunday. may be translated thus. it is not precisely correct.” it means “if not. using the indicated interpretation: D: The Democratic candidate is free of scandal. ~R ÷ P Note that “unless” always introduces an antecedent of a conditional.” Thus We will have the picnic on Sunday unless it rains. It is interesting to note that “~R ÷ P” is logically equivalent to “R w P” (and to “P w R”).Introductory Logic Neither the Democratic candidate nor the Republican candidate is free of scandal. as we shall show in the next chapter.

otherwise. I’ll shoot you. or If you do not work hard you will not get a good grade. otherwise I’ll shoot you.” This term. we'll go to a movie. ~H ÷ ~G As we shall show in the next chapter. Instead. when it is used to make a logically compound sentence. You will get a good grade only if you work hard. consider “otherwise. Thus. This may be translated thus. something of the form “N only if R” means “not N if not R”.” but just precisely what condition it refers to depends on the context. this is equivalent to G÷H hence “N÷R” can also translate “N only if R. But this sentence. 41 . means approximately this: If you don't give me the money. If it is good weather Sunday. Here are two examples: Give me the money.L1: Syntax and Translation does not mean the same as “if”. means “if that is not the case. using the indicated interpretation: H: You work hard. G: You will get a good grade. means the same as You will not get a good grade if you do not work hard.” Finally. we’ll go to the beach.

Consider this exchange: A: Is Alonzo intelligent? B: He can tie his own shoes without assistance. cleverness. we’ll go to the beach. When we listen to speakers. we are concerned only with what is literally said by the English sentences we are translating. Because of laziness. Some assumptions about people’s conversational behavior are so common that we may easily think what we infer on the basis of 42 . In each case. Language is a complex phenomenon. But speakers don’t always use sentences to convey that literal meaning. a speaker may use a sentence to convey a variety of messages in addition to or even other than the literal meaning of the sentence. though his sentence does not literally say this. the literal meaning of what they say is often important only as it enables us to infer the message they have in mind. carelessness. or for any of a number of other reasons. In making these inferences we rely on context. we’ll go to a movie.Introductory Logic means approximately this: If it is good weather Sunday. and in our logical discussions we try to ignore many features of it. On the other hand. Hence our L1 sentences do not capture any of the information that we infer from the English sentences. We would all recognize that B is here conveying the message that Alonzo is not very intelligent at all. or delight in word play. “otherwise” stands for the antecedent of a conditional. we primarily are trying to get the message they want to convey. We can think of sentences of natural language as having a relatively fixed literal (dictionary) or conventional meaning. and its literal truth is in fact perfectly compatible with Alonzo’s being very intelligent. wit. For instance. the literal meaning of what he or she utters is not always the same as what the person is trying to communicate to his or her listeners. but only their literal meaning. and if it is not good weather. There is a final complication about natural language. when a person utters a sentence. information we may have about the speaker or about people in general. when we translate sentences into L1. but just what that conditional is depends on the context. and all sorts of general information that we have.

suppose we consider the sentence. We can say. we can misunderstand the literal meaning of natural language connectives.L1: Syntax and Translation these assumptions is part of the meaning of what they say.” Hence it is no part of the literal meaning of the sentence that the speaker does not know whether the consequent of the conditional is true. I will ordinarily use this sentence only if I don’t know which of the two came. Hence. as in a sentence like this: “If Alonzo came to the party then Gertrude did too. not to contradict the original statement. our hearers reasonably take us to imply that we don’t know whether or not Gertrude came.” One indicator that can help us distinguish the literal meaning of a sentence from what we infer from its use on many occasions is that the inferences can be canceled but the literal meaning can’t be. When an implication can be canceled in this way. it is not part of the literal meaning of the sentence. and seems merely to give further information. Gertrude came whether or not Alonzo came.” The second clause cancels the ordinary implication of the disjunction. If I knew that Gertrude came or that both came. For instance.” Here the second clause does not cancel an implication of the first clause. There are other examples involving connectives. Exercises 2-4 43 . Contrast that with this statement: “Alonzo or Gertrude came the party last night. we usually assume that people are being helpful and cooperative when they talk to us. We would not ordinarily say “If Alonzo came to the party last night Gertrude did too” if we knew that Gertrude came to the party. But this implication can be canceled. in fact.” If I am trying to be helpful and informative when talking to you about who came to the party. “Alonzo or Gertrude came to the party last night. Alonzo did. For instance. using a suitable interpretation. in fact. and so we can translate the sentence. for instance. “Alonzo or Gertrude came to the party last night. If we fail to distinguish these assumptions from the literal meaning of the sentence. I would not be being as helpful as I could if I only said that Alonzo or Gertrude came. by an L1 sentence like “A w G. trying to give us the best information they can. in fact neither did. But this fact that you infer is not part of the literal meaning of the sentence. it contradicts it. when we say this.

however. A: E: J: L: S: T: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Alonzo disgraced himself. otherwise Alonzo disgraced himself.Introductory Logic Translate the following sentences into L1 using the interpretation given. Tom came to the party. Julius did not have a good time. translate the following into graceful. If Ellen danced lewdly. Tom and Sally both came to the party. Neither Tom nor Sally came to the party. Alonzo disgraced himself if and only if Ellen was drunk. Tom didn't come to the party. Ellen danced lewdly. Ellen neither danced lewdly nor was drunk. Ellen danced lewdly but was not drunk. Tom came to the party if and only if Sally did. Julius did not have a good time. Ellen danced lewdly if Tom came to the party. Unless Alonzo disgraced himself. Julius had a good time. Ellen was drunk. Julius had a good time provided Ellen was not drunk. he did not. Julius had a good time. but not Sally. Sally came to the party if Alonzo disgraced himself. she danced lewdly. idiomatic English: 23 44 EwL . then Julius had a good time. Tom. Using the interpretation above. If Sally came to the party. Julius had a good time only if Alonzo did not disgrace himself. If Sally came to the party. Alonzo disgraced himself unless Ellen was drunk. Ellen danced lewdly. she was drunk. Either Tom or Sally came to the party. otherwise. Ellen danced lewdly only if Tom came to the party. Ellen danced lewdly if she was drunk. came to the party. Although Ellen was not drunk. Sally came to the party.

and the parts joined by it.L1: Syntax and Translation 24 25 26 27 28 T÷S ~J ÷~A ~(A w E) ~L ÷ ~A ~(T & S) 5: Complex Translations Complex translations are best done step by step. First one finds the main connective. then neither the Orioles nor the Braves will have any serious obstacles between them and the World Series. Now we just have to translate the two sentences on either side of the arrow and replace the English sentences with their translations.” 45 . If the Mets and Tigers continue to lose. To translate the sentence into L1. Then these parts are further analyzed in the same way. we begin by identifying the main connective of the translation. O: The Orioles will have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series. so we rewrite the sentence in this way as a sort of amalgam of L1 and English: The Mets and Tigers continue to lose ÷ Neither the Orioles nor the Braves will have any serious obstacle between them and the World Series. Let us begin with “The Mets and Tigers continue to lose. Complex translations from English to L1 are best done by proceeding step by step. and one proceeds down the parse tree of the L1 sentence. In this case it is obviously the arrow. Consider the following interpretation and sentence of English: B: The Braves will have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series. Perhaps an example will make this clear. M: The Mets continue to lose. T: The Tigers continue to lose.

” and so may be translated “~(O w B). it is obviously “&.” Note the parentheses! Using them at each stage (except possibly the first) will guarantee that they end up in the correct place. “neither N nor N. In the case of the sentence above. there will be more than one way to do this.” Replacing this in partial translation gives the completed translation into L1: (M & T) ÷ ~(O w B) Let’s remind ourselves of the parse tree for this sentence: (M & T) ÷ ~(O w B) | M & T | M T O ~(O w B) | O w B | B Our translation proceeded along the lines of the parse tree. Let’s translate from this sentence of L1 back into English to see how this works. we start by recognizing the interpretations of the sentence letters. Our first attempt to create a part of the translation might be this: The Mets continue to lose and the Tigers continue to lose. Then we put together the sentences. we get: (M & T) ÷ Neither the Orioles nor the Braves will have any serious obstacle between them and the World Series. Typically. 46 . The steps of translation reconstruct the parse tree from the top down. The remaining sentence is of the form. beginning by identifying the main connective of the whole sentence and the parts joined by it. it is usually better to proceed from the bottom up. Inserting our translation into the partial translation above.” Hence this sentence is translated as “(M & T). working up from the bottom of the parse tree. When translating from L1 to English. The object of translation into English is to produce a well-crafted English sentence that says what the sentence of L1 says.Introductory Logic Again we look for the main connective.

and we observe that it can be simplified: Neither the Orioles nor the Braves will have any serious obstacle between them and the World Series. let’s choose “provided that”: Neither the Orioles nor the Braves will have any serious obstacle between them and the World Series. At the next step we might try. Since there are many English phrases that can translate any particular bit of L1. this is awkward. Once again. and here we might get this: Either the Orioles will have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series or the Braves will have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series. however. It is not the case that either the Orioles or the Braves have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series. You will notice that this English sentence is not the same as the sentence that we started with. This is our completed translation. It means very nearly the same. However.L1: Syntax and Translation but we observe that this can be put much more succinctly as The Mets and Tigers continue to lose. we cannot expect that we will get the same 47 . we put everything together. We can choose any of the equivalent expressions we have noticed for expressing conditionals. provided that the Mets and Tigers continue to lose. We can’t go further without working on the other part of the bottom of the tree. a more succinct version is obvious: Either the Orioles or the Braves will have a serious obstacle between them and the World Series. Finally.

because the L1 sentence is not ambiguous. but not always. is not ambiguous. because we have used a single subject with conjoined predicates. both commas in the sentence above. C: Gertrude is a C++ programmer (A ÷ G) & C we must produce an English sentence which has the same main connective as the L1 sentence. it might have either conjunction or the conditional as its main connective. for instance. and Gertrude is a C++ programmer. It can only have this translation: A ÷ (G & C) What grammarians call correlative conjunctions provide another mechanism for grouping in English. then Gertrude owns a computer. If Alonzo owns a computer then Gertrude owns a computer and is a C++ programmer. One way is to combine identical subjects or predicates. English punctuation rules were not designed by logicians and require. For instance. For instance. it is sometimes necessary to take special measures to preserve the grouping. but English doesn’t. This last English sentence is ambiguous. using the given interpretation. So in translating from L1 into English. A: Alonzo owns a computer G:Gertrude owns a computer. Correlative conjunctions are 48 . Students sometimes think that grouping can be provided by punctuation. English provides various resources for indicating grouping. if we want to translate this sentence. this sentence. and sometimes it can. However. we should get sentences that say very nearly the same thing. It is not a good translation of the L1 sentence.Introductory Logic English sentence back when we translate into L1 and back. This would not do: If Alonzo owns a computer. L1 provides parentheses for grouping.

Correlative conjunctions cannot solve all grouping problems. Not all ambiguities in English grouping are harmful. we need to add some other words. Consider this: If Gertrude is a C++ programmer and Alonzo owns a computer. and to show that the connective corresponding to the coordinating conjunctions is higher in the parse tree than any connective involved in the material between the conjunctions. because the “If” and “then” group together into the antecedent the two sentences joined by “and” and put them together in the antecedent of the conditional. For instance. This sentence is not ambiguous. when that produces a sentence equivalent to the original.” and “if . though. or Gertrude owns a 49 . and if Alonzo owns a computer then Gertrude does too. Sometimes a sentence is best translated by changing the order of the components. For instance. then. our original sentence might best be translated this way: Gertrude is a C++ programmer.” as we shall learn in the next chapter.L1: Syntax and Translation grammatical conjunctions that are used in pairs like “either . because they can only group together items on the left side of the conjunction. or.. then Gertrude owns a computer... because “C & (A ÷ G)” is logically equivalent to “(A ÷ G) & C. we could translate our original sentence unambiguously in this way: It’s both true that if Alonzo owns a computer then Gertrude does.” These serve to group together whatever comes between the two conjunctions... For instance. and also that Gertrude is a C++ programmer. and. Either Alonzo owns a computer. although this sentence. So this sentence can only be translated this way: (C & A) ÷ G Sometimes to make correlative conjunctions fit into sentences naturally.” “both ..

A: E: G: M: P: R: S: 1 2 3 50 Alonzo will come to the picnic. however. then Gertrude owns a computer. Alonzo will come to the picnic only if Ethel is not distressed. Gertrude will come to the picnic.” or it might qualify the whole sentence. Alonzo and Gertrude will go to a movie together. unless Gertrude is a C++ programmer. There will be a picnic on Sunday. the ambiguity is harmless. Another example is this sentence: If Alonzo owns a computer. Exercises 2-5: Translate the sentences into L1 using the following interpretation. Gertrude won’t. in which case the sentence is translated by “A ÷ (~C ÷ G).” But again. Gertrude will come to the picnic if and only if Alonzo does.Introductory Logic computer. we’ll learn how to demonstrate this in the next chapter. If Alonzo comes to the picnic. are logically equivalent. It will rain on Sunday. has ambiguous grouping. because the two readings are logically equivalent. Ethel will be distressed. translated by “(A w G) w C” and “A w (G w C)” respectively. or Gertrude is a C++ programmer. in which case the sentence would be translated by “~C ÷ (A ÷ G). Gertrude is sick. because the two readings. If there is a picnic on Sunday and Alonzo comes then Ethel . Ethel will be distressed. The “unless” clause might be part of the consequent. and if Gertrude doesn’t. this doesn’t matter.

If it doesn’t rain on Sunday and neither Alonzo nor Gertrude comes to the picnic. 12 If the plotter has overheated and the network is down then either the Wilbursteen project will be two weeks late or Silvia will be promoted. Alonzo and Gertrude will go to a movie together unless it fails to rain on Sunday. but otherwise there will be a picnic and both Alonzo and Gertrude will come. Ethel will be distressed. 51 . N: The network is down. Alonzo will come to the picnic only if Gertrude does.L1: Syntax and Translation will be distressed. however. H: Hubert has hepatitis. W: The Wilbursteen project will be two weeks late. P: The plotter has overheated. in which case they will go to the picnic and Ethel will not be distressed. and idiomatic English. accurate. on the basis of the abbreviation scheme above. S: Silvia will be promoted. 4 5 6 7 8 Translate the following into smooth. but if there is no picnic. Ethel will be distressed if and only if Alonzo and Gertrude go to a movie together. unless Gertrude is sick. 9 10 11 ~R ÷ [P & (A ø G)] ~P w (A ø ~ G) (R & P) ÷ [E & (~A w ~G)] Translate the sentences into L1 using the following interpretation. then Ethel will be distressed unless Alonzo and Gertrude go to a movie together. B: The Boss is angry. E: Ethel is taking pregnancy leave. there will be a picnic and either Alonzo or Gertrude will come. Alonzo and Gertrude will go to a movie together. If it rains on Sunday there will be no picnic and Ethel will be distressed. but if it rains. Unless it rains on Sunday. if it rains on Sunday and there is no picnic.

15 16 [(B & E) & N] ÷ (W w S) (N ø P) & [(W ÷ B) w H] 52 . accurate. Hubert has hepatitis. Translate the following into smooth. and idiomatic English. unfortunately. and either the network is down or the plotter has overheated. on the basis of the abbreviation scheme above. Ethel is taking pregnancy leave.Introductory Logic 13 14 If Hubert has hepatitis then the Wilbursteen project will be two weeks late unless the Boss is not angry Silvia will be promoted only if the Wilbursteen project will not be two weeks late.

to find out whether a sentence of L1 is true. 1: Truth of Sentences of L1 The truth of a sentence of L1 depends only on the truth or falsity of its atomic components. “S ÷ T” is false and “S w T” is true. which is the logic of the truth-functional sentence connectives. consult the truth tables for these connectives in Chapter 2. we don’t need to know the interpretation of the sentences. Then we will see how to calculate all possible truth values for a sentence in a truth table. for many purposes. we don’t need to concern ourselves with the interpretation at all. Finally. so the truth of a whole sentence is determined by the truth or falsity of its atomic components. S: Snow is white T: Tellurium occurs in a dark red crystalline form. the following interpretation.) Thus. We shall begin by explaining how to calculate the truth-value of a sentence. we need the notion of an assignment 53 . Thus if “S” is true and “T” is false. we only need to be concerned with the truth values it gives the sentences. However. we only need to know whether its atomic components are true or false. because it makes “S” true and “T” false. except to find out whether the sentences are true or false. as we shall call it. (If you are not sure why this is so. we shall explain the relation of all this to the logic of English sentences.Logical Properties in L1 Chapter 3: Truth Functional logic In this chapter we will explain the logic of L1. Thus. Sentences of L1 are built up out of atomic components by truth-functional connectives. We shall explain how these calculations enable us to establish the logical properties of the sentences. or truth-functional logic. makes “S ÷ T” false. and shall define the truth-functional logical relations in this way. To be precise about this. given the truth values of its atomic components. From the point of view of truth and falsity.

if we are concerned only with the sentence. In presenting assignments of truth values.” our assignment of truth values need only assign truth values to the letters “P. for example. For instance.Introductory logic of truth values to sentence letters of L1. “Q” the value False. “P w (Q ÷ R). we shall only concern ourselves with the truth values of the sentence letters we have to deal with on any given occasion. So. consider the sentence above. the atomic sentences.” and “R. and “R” the value False also. P w (Q ÷ R) P = T Q ÷ R Q = F R = F Next we calculate the values of each other entry in the parse tree referring to the truth tables for each connective (which we have 54 . Using the syntax of the sentence as a guide. An assignment of truth values to sentence letters gives each sentence letter either the value True or the value False. we may determine the truth of a sentence of L1 using an assignment of truth values to its atomic components. We use the syntax of the sentence as our guide when calculating its truth value. “P w (Q ÷ R).” Its parse tree looks like this: P w (Q ÷R) P Q Q ÷ R R We can begin by assigning truth values to the bottommost entries in the parse tree.” like this: P: T Q: F R: F This assignment gives “P” the value True. in accord with the above assignment of truth values.” “Q.

Logical Properties in L1 memorized!). we mark the main connective of the sentence. To make it easier to see the result. First. We begin by entering the truth value assignment on the left. P w (Q ÷ R) P = T Q ÷ R = T Q = F R = F and then. then transfer it to the right: – 55 . and to the right we calculate the truth value of the sentence. since a conditional is true if its antecedent is false. since a disjunction is true if at least one disjunct is true: P w (Q ÷ R) = T P = T Q ÷ R = T Q = F R = F We can obviously calculate the truth value of any sentence of L1 this way. compressing it to two lines. Calculating the truth table using the parse tree takes up a good deal of space. We begin thus: – P Q R T F F P w (Q ÷ R) To the left we write the truth value assignment. so we shall adopt a more compact representation of the calculation.

This helps us to avoid mistakes.Introductory logic P Q R P w (Q ÷ R) T F F T F F Now we calculate the truth values of the various component sentences. it is important to calculate the values in the same order that we calculated them on the parse tree. 56 . Exercises 3-1 For each of the following sentences. entering the resulting truth value under the main connective for that sentence: – P Q R P w (Q ÷ R) T F F T then FTF – P Q R P w (Q ÷ R) T F F TT FTF Though we write the calculation in two lines. Then calculate the truth value of the sentences according to the given assignment of truth values using the parse tree. make a parse tree.

each line of the truth table after the first looks just like the second line of a two-line calculation of the truth or a sentence given an assignment of truth values. each line of which corresponds to an assignment of truth values to the sentence letters of the sentence.Logical Properties in L1 A: B: C: D: E: F: 1 2 3 4 5 6 T F T F T F A ÷ (~B w C) ~(C ø (D & ~E)) ~~[(A & B) ø (~F w B)] (A w B) ÷ ~[C & (D ø E)] (B & A) ø [(C w F) ÷ D] ~(C w F) & [(A ÷ ~B) ø D] For each of the following sentences. 7 8 9 10 11 12 (A ø B) w (C ø D) (A ÷ B) & ~[C & (D w E)] (B ÷ C) ÷ [(D & F) w ~(B & C)] (C ø E) & [(D ÷ F) w (F ÷ D)] (B w C) ø ~[D ÷ (E & F)] [B ÷ (C & D)] ÷ [(C ø A) w~ F] 2: Calculating all Possible Truth Values We calculate all the possible truth values for a sentence in a truth table. calculate the truth value in the two-line compact form. In fact. A truth table is a rectangular tabulation of truth values. using the assignment of truth values given above. Here is a sample truth table for the sentence “P ÷ Q”: 57 .

making sense of truth tables is much easier if they are always presented in the same order. a sentence with n different sentence letters in it will generate a truth table of 2n rows. For convenience. its table has twice as many rows. it does not matter in what order we present the rows of a truth table. we can also make truth tables for longer sentences with more sentence letters.Introductory logic ? P T T F F Q T F T F P÷Q TTT TFF FTT FTF Of course. We specify two features of the truth table order: the order in which the sentence letters are to appear in the left of the 58 . In theory. This makes it possible to compare different truth tables easily. all of our truth tables will be done in a specified order. so long as we present all relevant rows and calculate them correctly. In general. In practice. for instance: ? P Q R (P ÷ (Q w ~R) T T T TT T T F TT T F T TF T F F TT F T T FT F T F FT F F T FT F F F FT T T FT T T TF F F FT F T TF T T FT T T TF F F FT F T TF Because this sentence has one more sentence letter than the previous one.

and the order the truth value assignments that appear on the various rows of the table. we assign them so that the rightmost column in the left part of the table)that for the alphabetically latest sentence letter)alternates T. thus: ? 59 . F.Logical Properties in L1 table. etc. etc. thus: ? Q R S T F T F T F T F S ÷ (Q ø R) The column immediately to the left of this one has two Ts followed by two Fs.. for instance. To assign truth values to the sentence letters.” we would begin the table thus: ? Q R S S ÷ (Q ø R) We assign truth values according to a simple binary pattern. So. regardless of the order in which they occur in the sentence. F. for the sentence “S ÷ (Q ø R). T.. Sentence letters occur on the left side of the table in alphabetic order.

like this: S S ÷ (Q ø R) ? Q T T T T F F F F R S S ÷ (Q ø R) The whole looks like this: 60 .Introductory logic Q R T T F F T T F F The column immediately preceding that has four Ts followed by four Fs.

To define the logical relations and properties of sentences in L1 we must explain the notion of a form and instances of forms for L1 as well. remembering that a truth table involving n sentence letters always has 2n rows. 1 2 3 4 5 6 M ÷ (~N w M) (S ø ~T) ÷ ~S (A ÷ D) ÷ (~C & D) S ÷ (Q & ~R) A w (~F ø G) (P w ~M) ÷ (N ÷ M) 3: Logical relations in L1 Sentences of L1 are their own forms. In L1 sentences are their own 61 . All of our definitions of logical relations in Chapter 1 involved the notion of forms and of instances of forms. Exercises 3-2: Make complete truth tables for each of the following. taking care to use the order prescribed above.Logical Properties in L1 ? Q T T T T F F F F R T T F F T T F F S T F T F T F T F S ÷ (Q ø R) The same basic pattern is continued for more or fewer sentence letters.

for some interpretations. For example. this will not cause any problems for us. and there remains the possibility that a counter-example—an even number that cannot be expressed as the sum of two prime numbers—exists. Thus an instance of the form “P ÷ Q” is this: P÷Q P: Plutonium has atomic number 94. but it has not been proved. it must be a very large number.10 Thus the form of “P 6 Q” is “P 6 Q. beyond the range that can be checked by computers. Of course. then we can calculate the truth values of the sentence as we have learned to do in the first section of this chapter.” An instance of a form is that form plus an interpretation. are true or false. consider this instance of “P 6 Q”: P6Q P: Goldbach’s conjecture11 is true. 62 10 . and so it cannot be true or false at all. Mathematicians suspect that it is true. but this would unnecessarily complicate the notion of form and all the subsequent discussion. 11 Goldbach’s conjecture is the claim that every even number greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two prime numbers. If there is one. A sentence of L1 doesn’t say anything unless it has an interpretation. In fact.Introductory logic forms. and this may seem incorrect. To determine whether an instance of a form is true or false. we may not know whether the statements the interpretation assigns to sentence letters are true or false. The observant reader will note that on this account “P ÷ Q” and “R ÷ S” have different forms. we must know whether the statements assigned the sentence letters by the interpretation are true or false. It would be straightforward to define the notion of a form in such a way that “P ÷ Q” and “R ÷ S” would have the same form. Instances. Q: The Queen of the United Kingdom in 1997 was Elizabeth II. as we would expect. forms are neither true nor false. In this case we will not be able to determine the truth value of that particular instance. Notice that on this definition. however.

since any form has an infinite number of instances! But. The form of an argument of L1 is that argument. This may seem like a formidable task.Logical Properties in L1 Q: The Queen of The United Kingdom in 1997 was Elizabeth I. each sentence has exactly one form. To determine whether a form is inconsistent. and pairs of sentences of L1 are defined in the obvious ways. The only thing that matters to the truth or falsity of sentences of L1 is the truth or falsity of the atomic sentences)sentence letters)that make them up. Hence we don’t know the truth value of this instance of “P ÷ Q. A set of statements is inconsistent if and only if it is an instance of some inconsistent form. we can apply the definitions of the logical relations in Chapter 1 to L1. We had these definitions for inconsistence and consistency: A form is inconsistent if and only if it has no instance all of whose statements are true. So we can use the following definitions for L1: A set of sentences of L1 is truth-functionally inconsistent if and only if there is no assignment of truth values on which all the sentences in the set are true. We don’t know whether P is true or false on this interpretation. In each case. With an understanding of forms and instances. by our account of form. fortunately. though we know that on this interpretation Q is false.” Forms of sets. we need to determine whether it has any true instances. arguments. The form of a set of sentences of L1 is that set of sentences of L1. 63 . Furthermore. we only need to check a finite number of possibilities. The form of a pair of sentences of L1 is that pair of sentences. Inconsistency can be explained as in Chapter 1. the instances of the form are the form plus an interpretation. A set of statements is consistent if and only if it is not an instance of any inconsistent form. the only thing that matters is the truth value assignment generated by any particular interpretation. That is to say.

These show all the possible truth values that the sentences can have for all their infinitely many instances.Introductory logic A set of sentences of L1 is truth-functionally consistent if and only if there is at least one assignment of truth values on which all the sentences in the set are true. any instance of it is as well. Consider the following set of sentences: P÷Q P ~Q We can determine whether it is consistent or inconsistent by constructing the following truth table: ? P Q P÷Q T T TTT T F TFT F T FTT F F FTF ? ? P ~Q T FT T TF F FT F TF Here we have made one truth table that shows the truth values of all the sentences simultaneously. Consequently. consider this set of sentences: P÷Q P ÷ ~Q We can similarly check these for consistency: ? ? 64 . this form is inconsistent. so there is no instance of this form that has all the sentences true. On the other hand. We can see by inspection that there is no line in this truth table where all the sentences are true. Some examples will make this clearer. Since the form is inconsistent.

In this case.Logical Properties in L1 P Q P ÷Q T T TTT T F TFF F T FTT F F FTF P ÷ ~Q T F FT T T TF F T FT F T TF The truth table has both sentences true in the third and fourth rows of the table. and (2) there is no instance where the two statements have different truth values. A pair of sentences is not truth functionally equivalent if there is at least one assignment of truth values on which the 65 . So this would suffice to show the sentences consistent: ? ? P Q P ÷Q F T FTT P ÷ ~Q F T FT Equivalence may be defined similarly. Recall the definition of equivalent forms from Chapter 1: A form is an equivalence form if and only if: (1) All its instances consist of exactly two statements. Given our account of forms for L1. Two statements are equivalent if and only if the pair of them is an instance of an equivalence form. we can give a simpler definition for truth-functional equivalence of sentences of L1: A pair of sentences is truth-functionally equivalent if and only if there is no assignment of truth values on which they have different truth values. One line is enough to show that there is one assignment of truth values that makes all the sentences true simultaneously. so the sentences are consistent. we don’t actually need the whole table.

these sentences are not equivalent. we do not need the whole table to show nonequivalence. the two sentences are equivalent. Recall the definitions of validity from Chapter 1: An argument form is valid if and only if it has no instance 66 . Of course. one line would suffice. We can check sentences for equivalence by means of a truth table. like this: ? ? P Q P ÷ ~Q F T F T FT ~(P ÷ Q) FFT T Validity may be defined in a similar way. For instance. this truth table shows that “F ÷ G” and “~F w G” are equivalent: ? ? F G F÷G T T TTT T F TFF F T FTT F F FTF ~F w G FT T T FT F F TF T T TF T F Since the table shows that on every line the sentences have the same truth values. On the other hand. as the table shows: ? ? P Q P ÷ ~Q T T T F FT T F T T TF F T F T FT F F F T TF ~(P ÷ Q) FTT T TTF F FFT T FFT F The sentences are not equivalent because in the third and fourth rows of the table they have different truth values.Introductory logic sentences have different truth values.

A valid argument is an argument that is an instance of a valid argument form. For instance. consider this argument: M ÷ (R w D) ~D & M ˆR This argument is valid. An invalid argument is an argument that is not an instance of any valid argument form. An argument in L1 is invalid if and only if it is not valid. along with our account of forms are the basis for the following definitions of validity and invalidity in L1: An argument in L1 is truth-functionally valid if and only if there is no assignment of truth values on which all its premises (if any) are true and its conclusion is false. as demonstrated by the following truth table: ? D M R M ÷ (D w R) T T T T T F T F T T F F TT TTT TT TTF FT TTT FT TTF ? ~D & M FT F T FT F T FT F F FT F F ? R T F T F 67 .Logical Properties in L1 where all the premises (if any) are true and the conclusion is false. if and only if there is at least one assignment of truth values on which all its premises (if any) are true and its conclusion is false. These definitions. As with inconsistency and equivalence. that is. we can check arguments for validity with a truth table.

4. and 8 and the first premise is false in line 6.” is false in lines 2. Of course. The following argument. however. 4. and 8. 6. so there is no line that shows the argument invalid. the whole table is not needed to show the argument invalid. but the conclusion is false. the second line alone would do: ? 68 ? ? . the second premise is false in lines 2. is not valid: W÷K K ˆW as the following truth table shows: ? K W W ÷K T T TTT T F FTT F T TFF F F FTF ? K T T F F ? W T F T F Here the second line of the table shows that the argument is invalid. both premises are true there.Introductory logic F T T F T F F F T F F F TT FTT TF FFF FT FTT FT FFF TF T T TF T T TF F F TF F F T F T F There is no line in this table where both premises have the value T while the conclusion is false. “R. Although the conclusion.

nonequivalence. suppose that we wish to show the following set consistent: A÷G G ÷ ~A G We begin by setting up the single line of the truth table we need. Sometimes it is easier to calculate that line directly rather than to search for it in a truth table.” we enter that in the other columns of the table for “G”. For instance. or validity. ? ? ? A G A÷G T G ÷ ~A T G T Since we have to give “G” the value “T. or invalidity is a single line of a table. equivalence. A complete truth table is needed to show inconsistency.Logical Properties in L1 K W W÷K T F FTT K T W F This displays the assignment of truth values that shows the argument invalid. 4: Shortcuts We can sometimes take shortcuts rather than doing a complete truth table. so we enter those values in the table. But all that is needed to show consistency. 69 . ? A G A÷G ? G ÷ ~A ? G We know that we want to make all three sentences true.

” must also have the value T (since a true conditional with a true antecedent must have a true consequent). Of course. We have shown the sentences consistent. but in this case they are. Suppose we wish to show the following sentences nonequivalent: BwC B&C We begin thus: 70 . so we enter that in the table. we can treat nonequivalence and invalidity similarly. and we have also specified that the whole sentence must have the value T. things do not always work out as simply as they did in the example above. When we are using this shortcut method. so we can now fill in those values: ? A F G T A÷G FTT ? G ÷ ~A T T TF T ? G We must check to be sure all these entries are now correct.Introductory logic ? A G T A÷G TT ? G ÷ ~A TT G T ? Now we look for other entries that are forced upon us by this one. We notice that we have given “G” in “G ÷ ~A” the value T. “A” must get the value F. Finding an appropriate assignment of truth values may involve trial and error. ? A G T A÷G TT ? G ÷ ~A TTT T ? G But since “~A” has been given the value T. “~A. So the consequent.

Let us try making “B” true. if we try this: INCORRECT! ? ? B F C F BwC FFF B&C T there is no way to complete the last cell of the table. For instance.” so let’s hope that works. we will try another guess. but which should be which? We will just have to guess. but we must not make both true. ? ? 71 . we have determined the truth values of “B” and “C. ? ? B C BwC F B&C T Now. We can either make “B” true or “C” true. Let us try the guess that makes continuing easiest: if we make “B w C” false. ? ? B C BwC T B&C F Now we have two ways to go on. there is no way to complete the line.Logical Properties in L1 ? B C BwC ? B&C We know we want to make one of the sentences true and the other false. if our guess turns out wrong. We must try again.

~E w G H & ~(I ÷ J). ~H w (I & J). G ÷ F.Introductory logic B T C BwC TT B&C TF Now if we make “C” false. Indicate how your truth table shows inconsistency. a truth table is a systematic way of trying all possibilities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 B 6 C. ~R ÷ S U w (W & X). A ÷ ~Z. (P w Q) ÷ ~P (R w S) ø P. ~(D w ~C) E & ~F. If you provide a full truth table. ~M ø ~L (N ø ~O) ø P. everything will work. A w ~Y . The moral of this example is that you must systematically try other possibilities if your first try doesn’t work. ? B T C F BwC TTF ? B&C TFF Here we have shown the sentences nonequivalent. 7 8 9 10 11 72 (P ÷ Q). ~J ÷ ~H K & (L w M). mark a line that shows the set consistent. ~O & P Show that each of the following sets of sentences is consistent either by providing a full truth table or by providing a single line of a truth table. B. R ÷ ~P. W ÷ (~U ø ~X). P ÷ ~Q (P & Q) ÷ Q. L ÷ (K ø ~M). ~C C ø D. N ÷ ~P. Of course. Exercises 3-4: Show that each of the following sets of sentences is inconsistent by providing a truth table. U & ~(W & X) (Z & ~Y) ÷ ~A. but sometimes you can limit the number of possibilities you have to try.

Indicate how your truth table shows equivalence. 19 20 21 22 23 24 I÷Q ~(M ÷ G) (P & Q) ÷ X (Z w T) ÷ E (L & K) ø (L & S) ~(R w C) & M Q÷I M ÷ ~G (P ÷ X) & (Q ÷ X) (Z ÷ E) w (T ÷ E) L & (K ø S) ~[(R & C) w M] Show that each of the following arguments is valid by providing a truth table. 13 14 15 16 17 18 A ø ~M ~(A ø M) ~P w T ~T ÷ ~P ~C w (D ÷ ~R) (C & D) ÷~ R ~(M & L) w S ~M w (L ÷ S) ~(R & K) & T (T & ~R) w (T & ~K) (P w ~S) & (H w S) [P & (S w H)] w (~S & H) Show that each of the following pairs of sentences is nonequivalent either by providing a full truth table or by providing a single line of a truth table. S ø ~G. (A ÷ ~J) & (A w J) ˆPøA Show that each of the following arguments is invalid either by providing a full truth table or by providing a single line of a truth table. Indicate how your truth table shows validity. 25 26 27 28 29 30 P&Q ˆPwQ H&B ˆBøH (P w S) & T ˆ ~(P & T) ÷ (S & T) P ÷ (S w T).Logical Properties in L1 12 (G & Y) w S. ~Y & (G w S) Show that each of the following pairs of sentences are equivalent by providing a truth table. If you provide a full truth table. mark a line that shows the pair non-equivalent. ˆ P ÷ S K ø (I & F). If you provide a full truth table. ~S ÷ ~T. 31 Q÷X ˆ X÷Q 73 . mark a line that shows the argument invalid. F ÷ I ˆ F ÷ K (P & A) w (A ø J).

L w M ˆ K w M A ÷ (D & Z). and provide appropriate demonstration of your finding -. G ÷ N P ÷ (C ø Z). as required. ~Z ˆ A H ø (R w T). ~R ÷ ~J ˆ R ÷ (P & ~J) (M ø S) ø ~T. R ÷ L. ~E w Z Determine whether the following are equivalent. ~N & Y. ~L & (~R w F) G w (Y ÷ N). as required. W ÷ (~A w ~B). ~(Z & P).either a truth table or a line of a truth table. 43 44 45 46 47 48 P ÷ (B & J) (P ÷ B) ÷ J (M ø T) ø C M ø (T ø C) (C w P) ø (P & U) (P & U) w (~P & ~C) E & ~E [L ÷ (F & ~L)] & L (P & D) w (~P & D) (Q ÷ D) & (~D ÷ Q) (F ø C) w K F ø (C w K) Determine whether the following are valid.either a truth table or a line of a truth table. (C ø P) & (~C ø P) (W & A) w (W & B).Introductory logic 32 33 34 35 36 P w ~Q ˆ ~Q ÷ P B w (M & A) ˆ B & (M w A) R ÷ (T ÷ W) ˆ (R ÷ T) ÷ W (P ÷ J) & R. D ÷ ~K. 37 38 39 40 41 42 F ÷ R. as required. 49 50 51 52 53 54 K ø L.either a truth table or a line of a truth table. T & (O ÷ T) ˆ X 5: Truth-Functional Logical Properties of English Sentences 74 . and provide appropriate demonstration of your finding -. ~T ˆ H W ÷ (N ÷ C). Z ÷ ~(E & O). and provide appropriate demonstration of your finding -. (S & M) w (S & T) ˆ (S & M) ÷ T Determine whether the following are consistent. W w N ˆ (N ÷ C) w (W ÷ C) ~[B & (S ÷ Q)]. D w I E & (O ø Z). B ÷ ~W I ÷ (D & K). B & (Q ÷ S) ˆ Q ~(X w ~O) ÷ T.

there will be differences between the logic of English and the logic of the sentences of L1 that purport to translate it. This will usually be true if all of the truth-functional connectives in the English sentence have been represented by connectives of L1. In the first place. the following is surely true: If it’s true that if I pray. I can easily prove that God exists. L1 captures only truth functional logic. L1 can only represent the logic of sentences that are accurately translatable by sentences of L1. We have mentioned before that there is some controversy about whether English sentences involving “if” are accurately translated by L1 sentences involving “÷”. However. the following two sentences are logically equivalent. Here is an example intended to illustrate these problems. Consider the proposition that if I pray. So truth-functional logic is by no means all of logic. Do you doubt that this argument is valid? We can show it valid in L1. 75 . For instance.Logical Properties in L1 Generally. then it is true that God exists. the truth-functional logical properties of English sentences are the truth-functional logical properties of their translations into L1. I don’t know whether that is true. all I need is the additional premise that I don’t pray. P: I pray. the evils of the world will be eliminated. With that as a premise. there are some limitations. Some who do not study logic are sophomores. Second. Insofar as the translations are not accurate. not all logic. but if it is true. That is. the evils of the world will be eliminated. then surely God exists. naturally it follows that there is controversy about whether logical relations involving sentences of English using “if” can be adequately represented by the logical relations of sentences of L1 involving “÷” that purport to translate them. but not truth-functionally equivalent: Some sophomores do not study logic. G: God exists. Using this interpretation: E: The evils of the world will be eliminated.

” Exercises 3-5: Determine whether the following are truth-functionally consistent and establish your answer by a truth table or a single line of a truth table as appropriate. This argument is adapted from C. 279-309. pp. what “÷” means. surely the argument offered in the example cannot prove that God exists. Stevenson. Some philosophers. as the reader may demonstrate with a truth table. They say that if we really understand what “if” means (namely. according to them). reprinted with a few changes in Rudner and Scheffler.” and so hold that although the L1 argument is valid. “If-iculties. 76 12 . Other amusing examples can be found in his article. Bobbs Merril. (Indianapolis. 27-49. we will see that only confusion or misunderstanding could make someone accept the first premise of the argument if he or she did not already believe that God exists. eds.” Philosophy of Science v. the English argument is not.12 Whether or not God exists.Introductory logic the argument may be symbolized thus in L1: (P ÷ E) ÷ G ~P ˆG This argument is plainly valid. We shall not try to settle such controversies here. 37 (1970) pp. We will only stipulate that “if” in exercises in this book means exactly the same as “÷. who believe that “if” is accurately translated by “÷. but deny that “÷” accurately translates “if.” believe that the L1 argument is a good translation. Logic and Art: Essays in Honor of Nelson Goodman. 1972). L. Other philosophers think that there is no mistake involved in granting the English first premise.

5 If the red team is free from injuries then if the blue team’s star player is healthy then it will be a good game. The pointy-haired boss is mad. then the Flugelheim project is not delayed.Logical Properties in L1 1 If the Flugelheim project is delayed. then either the pointy-haired boss is mad or Wally will not be promoted. then it’s not both true that the red team is free from injuries and the blue team’s star player is healthy. we will all become famous. then Ernie did. It’s not true that both Ernie and Bert got lots of sleep. then a new printer is needed. Oscar got lots of sleep. 7 Provided we work hard. If it’s not a good game. 2 3 4 Determine whether the following are truth-functionally equivalent and establish your answer by a truth table or a single line of a truth table as appropriate. but Wally will be promoted. Ernie got lots of sleep if but only if Bert did. 6 The king is safe if and only if the rook is not attacked and the pawn structure is uncompromised. If Oscar got lots of sleep. If it’s not true that the computer should be scrapped. We’ll all become famous only if we find the gold. we will both pass the course and 77 . It’s both true that either the king is safe or the rook is not attacked and also that either the king is safe or the pawn structure is uncompromised. It’s not both true that a new printer is needed and that the computer has a virus. Either the mummy dates from the time of Cheops or we’ll find the gold and all become famous. however. If the mummy dates from the time of Cheops. It’s not true that if the computer has a virus then it should be scrapped. If the pointy-haired boss is mad.

Therefore. then if the television is working we can see Leno. You are visiting the island of knights and knaves. 9 The Pirates will win the pennant if but only if it’s true that if they get a new manager they’ll get a good one. knaves only false ones. 8 Emily will enjoy the party unless neither Tom nor Charles comes. furthermore. then either we can see Varsity Athlete or we can see Leno. the Pirates will get a good manager. You encounter two inhabitants of the island who speak as follows: A: We are not both knights. Knights utter only true statements.Introductory logic learn a lot. if we work hard we’ll learn a lot. Knights and knaves are otherwise indistinguishable to one who first meets them. B: I am a knight. If the television set is working. Therefore. we’ll pass the course. You are to determine whether A is a knight or a knave and 78 10 . It’s neither true that they’ll win the pennant nor that they will not get a new manager. Determine whether the following are truth-functionally valid and establish your answer by a truth table or a single line of a truth table as appropriate. Emily will enjoy the party unless Tom doesn’t come. We can see Varsity Athlete if but only if we cannot see Leno. Appendix: Knights and Knaves There are many logic puzzles of the following sort. furthermore. if we cannot see Varsity Athlete. she will enjoy the party unless Charles doesn’t come. If we work hard.

that this is true: BøB So to find out whether A and B are knights or knaves. 1 2 3 4 You encounter two inhabitants of the island of knights and knaves. “Neither of us is a knight.” What are C and D? You encounter yet another pair of inhabitants. A says. Now what A says may be translated this way: ~(A & B) We don’t know whether this is true or false. Hence we can be sure that this is true: A ø ~(A & B) Similarly. We start with this interpretation: A: A is a knight B: B is a knight Since we are told that every inhabitant is either a knight or a knave. Puzzles of this sort yield readily to truth-functional analysis. we just have to find an assignment of truth values that makes both of these sentences true. but it is true if and only if A is a knight. C and D. we can know. E and G.” What are E and G? Two inhabitants of the island of knights and knaves are said to be the same type if both are knights or both are knaves. given what B said. “~A” says that A is a knave. they are said to be different types if one is a knight and the 79 . C says. There is only one such: A: T B: F Hence A must be a knight and B a knave. “If B is a knave then I am too. A and B. “At least one of us is a knave. E says.” What are A and B? You encounter two more inhabitants of the island.Logical Properties in L1 whether B is a knight or a knave. You might like to try your hand at some puzzles of this type.

1978). He says. saying. “N is a knight if and only if the left fork goes to the Capital City. are standing. Prentice Hall. ‘There is at most one knight among us. J and K. 80 .” K says. “I am a different type from K. and you come to a fork in the road where two inhabitants. “M is lying.” What are J and K? You are on your way to the Capital City of the island of knights and knaves. “I am the same type as J.’” What should you conclude? 5 6 For many logic puzzles like this.Introductory logic other a knave. see Raymond Smullyan. J says. M and N. ‘There is at least one knight among us. What is the Name of This Book: The Riddle of Dracula and Other Logical Puzzles (Englewood Cliffs. O and P.’ P said. You encounter two inhabitants of the island. You ask M whether the left fork leads to the Capital City.” N immediately chimes in. O said.” Does the left fork go to the Capital City? A traveler told me the following story: “One day while I was visiting the island of knights and knaves I met two inhabitants of the island. NJ.

A derivation begins with the premises (if any) of the argument. but in this chapter we will discuss a method of showing arguments valid that resembles mathematical proofs. A derivation’s steps can be mechanically checked for correctness. D1. there is no room for judgment or discretion in determining whether a derivation is correct. before taking a course) think of argument and inference. For this reason. and proceeds by simple steps to demonstrate the conclusion. is intended to model the sort of proof one might offer for a conclusion. Making truth-tables can be very tedious (and hence error prone). For instance.Derivations I Chapter 4: Derivations I In this chapter we will learn how to construct formal proofs of validity.” There are other reasons to want a natural deduction system. called derivations. We will begin with simple derivations using simple rules of inference and simple structural rules. nothing we have done seems to resemble a mathematical proof. this sort of system is called “natural deduction. consider the following simple argument: P ÷ (Q w R) Q÷S R÷S S÷T ˆP÷T 81 . The derivation system we will learn. So far. if one were rigorously arguing for the conclusion. then we will begin learning the details of D1. 1: Overview of Derivations Logic is about inference. The subject of derivations is so complex that it will be continued in the next chapter. although the process of creating derivations is not typically a mechanical one. then we will learn more complex rules involving sub-derivations. When we think of logic. in a system we shall call D1. we usually (at least. A paradigm of logic is the rigorous mathematical proof. First we will have an overview of the topic of derivations.

14 The first lines of the derivation must contain premises (if any) of the argument. 14 Strictly speaking. The details of the rules governing derivations vary depending on the logic text one uses. Another and more important reason for derivations looks toward topics to come in future chapters. The selection or rules and methods of deduction is largely a matter of convenience. it would take less work and be more likely to be correct. We number the lines in order. More complex arguments would take even more lines. it will turn out that there is no technique like constructing a truth table by which we can mechanically check for validity or invalidity.” as an indication that we have finished the derivation and indeed derived the conclusion successfully. which is said to be on the line. and taste. But they are very convenient. When we discuss quantificational logic. Derivations in our system. preceded by the word “SHOW. because given a sequence of lines we can always count to find the number. Constructing derivations will be our only method of showing validity. When we finish the derivation. D1. which is an annotation which cites the rule licensing the line. but a truth table that could show it valid would require 32 lines. are sequences of lines. since they too can be reconstructed from the basic sequence of sentences that makes up the derivation. which we shall discuss below. a justification for the line.Introductory Logic This argument is valid. the justifications and some of the structural elements are not needed. and possibly a structural element. A set of very strict rules governs what may occur on these lines and what may follow earlier lines in the sequence.13 In addition to its number. pedagogical usefulness. starting with 1. there are some requirements that all These numbers are theoretically dispensable. Of course.” which serves as a structural indicator to mark the conclusion we seek to derive. A derivation demonstrating the validity of this argument would be much shorter. 82 13 . a line must contain three other parts: a sentence of L1. and so we shall require them. we cancel the “SHOW” thus. A derivation is a sequence of lines of a particular sort. “SHOW. and the line after the premises contains the conclusion we seek to derive. But it would be extremely inconvenient to omit them.

” it can’t be used to infer other things. because it is not something we are given to reason 83 . you must use only the premises of that argument as premises in your derivation. We begin our derivation by writing the premise as line 1. Each justification must appeal to a Rule. Immediately after the premises we must state what we are trying to derive as our conclusion. premises must come before everything else. We begin with premises. we will talk about these more at the end of Chapter 5. Unlike lines in a proof not beginning with “SHOW. A & B 2.) The rule says that you may put anything as a premise. In this case the rule is the Premise Rule: Premise Rule: Any sentence may appear on a line as a premise. The premise rule allows you to write anything as a premise. SHOW B & A P A show line indicates what we are trying to prove. 1. (Annotation: P. provided there are no lines other than premises earlier in the proof. 1. 2: Getting Started with Derivations The easiest way to learn about derivations is to start a sample one. A & B P Lines of a derivation need justification. but if you are trying to show a particular argument valid. the justification is indicated by the annotation in the right column.Derivations I deductive systems of sentential logic must satisfy. Consider the following obviously valid argument: A&B ˆB&A We chose a trivial argument like this so we can concentrate on the mechanics of derivation. because it must cover every possible derivation you make. Next comes a “SHOW” line with the conclusion in it.

either N or R may appear Rules of inference always get new lines from previous lines. Introduction rules tell us how to infer new lines with the rule’s connective as a main connective. a goal we have set for ourselves in doing the derivation. When we succeed in showing the sentence following the “SHOW. (Line 2 is not accessible. in fact. A&B SHOW B & A A B P 1. 4. Each is either an Exploitation Rule or an Introduction rule. because we cannot use it with our inference rules until we have actually derived the sentence on the “SHOW” line. so we will get them one after the other: 1. &E 1. (Annotation: the line number of the earlier line plus &E. The basic rules of inference that we will encounter in this chapter are associated with particular connectives. &-Exploitation will allow us to infer new lines from line 1 of our sample derivation. We will say that it is not accessible.) This rule corresponds to perfectly ordinary reasoning: If I know that both diamonds and rubies are gems. An Exploitation rule for a particular connective tells us how to use (exploit) earlier lines in the proof with the rule’s connective as their main connective. Introduction and Exploitation rules for “&.Introductory Logic from.” The exploitation rule for “&” is this: alone on a line. 2. 3.) We can infer either conjunct.” we will cancel the “SHOW” (“SHOW”) to indicate that it is no longer a goal but rather something that we have established. we will want both. but something we are to reason to. At that point it becomes accessible. We need rules of inference. Let us see how this works with the connective “&. but not from line 2. the 84 . So far we have merely been setting up the derivation for the particular argument we wish to show valid.” the only one involved in our sample derivation. &E &-Exploitation Rule: If N & R appears on an earlier accessible line of a derivation. I can surely conclude that rubies are gems. To actually derive the conclusion we must use rules that license us to infer other lines from the lines we already have. because it begins with uncanceled "SHOW".

&E 3. 2.)))))))))))P DD 1.Derivations I justification of these lines always includes the line numbers of these earlier lines. 4." we must add a justification to the “SHOW” line. as well as the abbreviation of the rule used. N & R may appear on a line. *B 5. We have completed our derivation by deriving the sentence on the “SHOW” line. the lines following it that led up to the line on which “B & A” appears.) Boxing and canceling requires justification. &E 1. When we cancel a "SHOW. A&B SHOW B & A A B B&A P 1. We can use this rule to complete the sample derivation we have started. 1. The introduction rule for & is this: &-Introduction Rule: If N and R appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. 4. The 85 . *B & A * . Boxing and Canceling. 4. We box the lines that justify canceling both to show which lines justify the cancellation and to indicate that they are no longer accessible. 5. 1. (Annota- tion: the line numbers of the earlier lines on which the conjuncts appear plus &I. A & B 2. &I We inferred the line five from lines 3 and 4 as indicated in the justification column.) This rule also corresponds to ordinary reasoning: if I know that dogs are canids and also that jackals are canids. We must now indicate that this is a completed derivation. &E 3. &I Canceling the “SHOW” indicates that the sentence on that line has actually been derived)it is no longer merely a goal. (In this case it doesn’t matter that they are accessible. 3. because we have completed the derivation. 3. &E 1. We do this by canceling the “SHOW” and boxing the lines that justify it. SHOW B & A +))))))))))). I can surely conclude that both dogs and jackals are canids. *A * * 4.

Here are diagrammatic presentations of the &-exploitation and &-introduction rules: &E N&R N ))))) N&R R )))))) &I N R )))) N&R The diagrams use the meta-linguistic variables from Chapter 2. The sentence on that line is the conclusion of the derivation.) When we have boxed and canceled the “SHOW” line immediately following the premises.” We can present rules diagrammatically. relegating the verbal 86 . Above the line in the diagram we place the representations of the premises that must be available on earlier accessible lines to use the rules. (Annotation: DD)appears on the “SHOW” line. the “SHOW” may be canceled and all the subsequent lines boxed. it may be replaced by any sentence of L1)with the understanding that in a given diagram. Below the line we place the representation of the sentence that the rule allows us to infer. A derivation is completed when and only when the first “SHOW” line is canceled. the order in which they occur does not matter. the derivation is said to be a derivation of its conclusion from its premises (if any). Thus our sample derivation is a derivation of “B & A” from “A & B. Where a Greek letter occurs in the diagrams.Introductory Logic rule cited here is the Direct Derivation rule: Direct Derivation Rule: When a sentence on a line (other than an uncanceled “SHOW” line) is identical to the sentence on the most recent uncanceled “SHOW” line. We will present all rules of inference from now on as diagrams. the derivation is completed. the same sentence must replace that Greek letter at all of its occurrences. The rules of D1 are often easier to grasp when presented diagrammatically.

Because the diagrams of structural rules may be more easily misunderstood than those of inference rules. you may infer: a) A b) B c) C d) A w B e) B w C f) A w C From “A w B” and “C” using &I.Derivations I presentation of the rules to an appendix to this chapter. (The diagram does not clearly indicate. * * * * * N * . we will always present the rule as well as the diagram. you may infer: 87 2 .))))))))- This diagram indicates that you are permitted to box and cancel when you have arrived at the sentence on the “SHOW” line. indicate which of the subsequent sentences can be inferred from the given sentence or sentences using the indicated rule. but the rule specifies. The DD rule can also be presented as a diagram: DD SHOW N +)))))))).) Exercises 4-2: In each case. 1 From “A & (B & C)” using &E. that there must be no uncanceled “SHOW” lines between the canceled “SHOW” and the final occurrence of the sentence shown.

because the connective is symmetric. and I know that she is not in her room. The w-Exploitation rules corresponds to ordinary reasoning: for instance. We can use these new rules. to construct the following derivation: 88 . I & J ˆ G & J K & (L ÷ M). if I know that either Janet is at the movies with Bill or she is in her room studying. I can conclude that she is at the movies with Bill.” Here are the exploitation and introduction rules for “w:” wE NwR ~N )))))) NwR ~R )))))) wI N ))))) R )))) R N NwR NwR Each rule has two forms.Introductory Logic a) (A w B) & C b) C & (A w B) c) C & A d) C & C e) (A w B) & (A w B) f) (A w B) & (A w C) Construct proper derivations in D1 showing the following arguments valid. I can conclude that the disjunction is. T & W ˆ R & T 3: More Rules of Inference There are Exploitation and Introduction rules for “w. The w-Introduction rule does not exhibit a common pattern of reasoning. (Q w R) & R ˆ (P & (Q w R)) & R ((S w T) & R) & W. 3 4 5 6 7 8 A & (B w C) ˆ B w C D & (E & F) ˆ D & F G & H. if I know that one disjunct is true. along with those we have already learned. (K ÷ M) & L ˆ (K & L) & (L ÷ M) P & (Q ÷ R). but it is surely sound.

15 its diagram looks like this: ÷E N÷R N ))))) R This rule corresponds to ordinary reasoning: When I know that if Pamela insulted Quentin. There is an exploitation rule for “÷. * D * 6. * Q * 7. * R & Q * . 4.) The ÷-Exploitation rule is sometimes called Modus Ponens. * R * 6. I may conclude that Quentin was upset. line 4 was inferred with the &-exploitation rule. 4.Derivations I 1. wI We used the rules at lines 5 and 6. * D w E * 5. then Quentin was upset. 89 15 . P ÷ Q 2. SHOW R & Q +))))))))))). * P * 5.)))))))))))P P DD 2. &E 2. &E 2. &I “Modus Ponens” is Latin for “the method of positing” or “the method of asserting. 4. &E 1. * D w F * . C & (D w E) 2. ~E 3. We can use it in the following derivation: 1. wE 5. but we do so by a structural rule rather than by a rule of inference. 4. but there is an exploitation rule. (We can derive conditionals. SHOW D w F +)))))))))))))). we will discuss this in section 4 of this chapter. ÷E 5. 6. and I know that Pamela insulted Quentin. R & P 3.” The name is of medieval origin.” For “÷” there is no introduction rule.))))))))))))))P P DD 1.

H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G +))))))))))). The ø-Introduction rule reflects this as well: øI N ÷ R R÷N )))))) NøR We can illustrate the use of both these rules in the following derivation: 1. 7. 9. 6. &E 2.Introductory Logic The introduction and exploitation rules for “ø” reflect its equivalence to a conjunction of conditionals. øE 6. then I can surely conclude that porpoises are mammals.)))))))))))P P P DD 1. The øExploitation rule has two forms: øE NøR N )))))) NøR R )))))) R N This rule corresponds to ordinary ways of reasoning: if I know that porpoises are mammals if and only if whales are. øI 90 . &E 3. 8. The ø-Exploitation rule reflects the ÷-Exploitation rule and the fact that a biconditional is equivalent to a conjunction of conditionals. 4. 5. 2. 8. and I know that whales are mammals. 5. 3. *H * *G ÷ F * *I * *F ÷ G * *F ø G * . øE 1. 7.

~A. C & D. and B. C ÷ B. and A w C using øE you may infer: a) B b) B & C c) A ÷ B d) C e) B w C From A ÷ B. and C ÷ A using øI you may infer: a) A ø B b) B ø A c) C ø A d) A ø A 2 3 4 5 Provide derivations in D1 showing each of the following valid. C. indicate which of the sentences can be inferred from the given sentence using the indicated rule. 1 From A w B using wI you can infer: a) A b) (A w B) w C c) B w A d) (D ÷ C) w (A w B) e) (B w A) w (A w B) f) M w (A w B) g) (A w B) w (A w B) h) A w (B w C) From A w (C & D).Derivations I Exercises 4-3: For each of the following. B ÷ A. and ~(A & D) using wE you may infer: a) A w D b) C & D c) C d) A & D From B ÷ (C & D). using ÷E you may infer: a) C & D b) B ÷ D c) D & C d) B From A ø B. ~C. A. 91 .

~X. P & ~Q ˆ R & P A & (C ø D). Q ÷ A. 2. C & ~P ˆ D & (A & ~P) M ÷ (T ÷ C). R ÷ (M &~S). but we recognize that if we can derive “F 6 G” and “G 6 F” we will be able to reach the conclusion by øI. because we haven’t yet figured out how to show “F ÷ G” Similarly. C & D ˆE w B F ø G. because we don’t yet know how many lines will go between them. H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G P P P Suppose we weren’t sure how to proceed. Z w E. ~H & I. we put a question mark in place of the line number for the next show line. SHOW F 6 G We leave space between line 7 and the next line. ~Z & L ˆ Y w (X & Z) (A & R) & G. 2. We now set about to get “F ÷ G. C ÷ ~A. H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G SHOW F ÷ G P P P ?. S w Q ˆ Q w S 4: Subderivations and two more rules Subderivations are derivations inside other derivations. Suppose we have started our derivation like this: 1. X w (V ÷ T) ˆ T ø V (E & L) ÷ Y. A ÷ R ˆ R w S A w B. 3. 4. 3. N ÷ ~J. 5. 4. N & (M w O) ˆ K & O W & (T ÷ V).” as though it were all we needed 92 . We can illustrate the idea of a subderivation by doing the last example from the previous section in a different way.Introductory Logic 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 P ÷ (Q w R). H w G ˆ F & I J w (K & ~M). So we set ourselves the goal of getting “F 6 G” thus: 1. M & T ˆ C w (T ø M) P & Q.

4. * F ø G * . *SHOW F ÷ G * *+)))))))))). øE Now that we have reached our goal. They have done their work in supporting the derivation of line 5. 3. 2. *SHOW G ÷ F * *+)))))))))). **I * * 7. Since the “SHOW” has been canceled. 7. * F ÷ G * . øE DD 1. it is no longer a mere goal. Line 5. We cannot use them again. &E 2. H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G +)))))))))))))). 1.)))))))))).)))))))))). **H * * 10. &E 3. H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G SHOW F ÷ G I F÷G P P P 1. we cancel only the most recent “SHOW”. H&I H ø (G ÷ F) I ø (F ÷ G) SHOW F ø G SHOW F ÷ G +))))))))))).Derivations I to do. 3. &E 3. 4. but something we may use. they are no longer accessible. * 9. 5. * I * 7. øI 93 . 9.)))))))))))P P P DD 1. 2. 5. however. 6. 3. &E 3. 4. øE Now that we have boxed lines 6 and 7. 8.* 11. 6. 6. 5. 6. 6. * 6. we can box and cancel)but as always. is now accessible. **F ÷ G * * *.))))))))))))))P P P DD DD 1. 1. We can complete the derivation this way: 1. **G ÷ F * * *.* 8. 2. øE 5.

Subderivations may not overlap. the subderivations haven’t really enabled us to do anything we couldn’t have done without them. we box and cancel the “SHOW” we began with. the procedure looks like this: CD SHOW N ÷ R +)))))))))))))). “To derive a conditional. however. But “SHOW” lines play a special role in connection with the next two rules we shall learn. P w R 3. Deriving conditionals involves assumptions and a new box-and-cancel rule. Above we noted that there was no introduction rule for “÷. and may nest them inside each other. In a conditional derivation we begin with a “SHOW” line. When we have done so. The “SHOW” lines merely served to remind us of the strategy we were pursuing for the derivation. we follow the slogan. Q ÷ ~P 2. assume 94 .* . Immediately after the “SHOW” line we make an assumption: we assume the antecedent of the conditional.” In this example.)))))))))). 1. this is guaranteed by the rule that whenever we box and cancel.” To derive conditionals we use a special sort of derivation. we must always cancel the most recent uncanceled “SHOW. so that there may be a subderivation inside a subderivation inside a subderivation inside the main derivation.))))))))))))))- Let’s work through an example. Subderivations may be nested as deeply within derivations as you wish. *N * * SHOW R * * +)))))))))). whenever we encounter a “SHOW” line with a conditional on it. the conditional derivation. * ** * * ** * * ** * * **R * * * .Introductory Logic A derivation may have as many subderivations as you wish. In a diagram. We then attempt to derive the conclusion of the conditional. SHOW Q ÷ R P P As a rule.

P w R 3. SHOW Q ÷ R 4. * 6. 4. Q 5.” and thereby we have done everything we need to do in order to show “Q ÷ R.)))))))))))1. wE Having shown “R. ~P 7. 3. 5. 2. Q ÷ ~P PwR SHOW Q ÷ R Q SHOW R +))))))))))). 3. ÷E 2. 4.” In doing so. 4.” so we may cancel the “SHOW” on line 3 and box the subsequent lines. *SHOW R *+))))))). 4. 6. * R . 4. Q ~P ÷ 2. 5. ÷E 2. Q ÷ ~P PwR SHOW Q ÷ R Q SHOW R P P ACD The annotation for line 4 is “ACD. R P P ACD 1. ÷E 2. 6. P P ACD DD 1. wE 95 . 1. and 4 is not difficult: 1. 2.” That slogan tells us what the next two lines of our derivation should be: 1.” which stands for “Assumption for Conditional Derivation. SHOW Q ÷ R +))))))))))).” we may box and cancel the “SHOW” on line 5. “Q. we may use our assumption. 2. *Q * * 5. SHOW R 6.” Deriving “R” from lines 1. **~P * * 7. *~P * * 7. 6. ** R * * P P CD ACD DD 1. wE Now we have reached our goal of showing “R.Derivations I the antecedent and try to derive the consequent.” Now we must derive “R. 6. 4. Q ÷ ~P 2. P w R 3.

))))))).* . but suppose she did. Notice also that an assumption may be made only immediately after a “SHOW” line of the proper form. one to justify the assumption line and one to justify boxing and canceling the “SHOW” preceding the conditional. So I conclude that if Gertrude went to the movies with Alonzo. or her roommate Ethel is there.) Notice that the assumption is optional according to the strict formulation of the rule. We also need a rule that justifies canceling the “SHOW” preceding the conditional. we will always make the assumption whenever we can. then her roommate Ethel is in her 96 . Assumptions cannot be made whenever one wants. I may reason as follows: I don’t know whether Gertrude went to the movies with Alonzo. then the “SHOW” line may be canceled and subsequent lines boxed. but it corresponds to ordinary ways of thinking. then she’s not in her room. here it is: line and the most recent uncanceled “SHOW” line is of the form N ÷ R.)))))))))))- The derivation is complete. The Conditional Derivation procedure may at first seem complicated. referring to the rule of Conditional Derivation. (Annotation: ACD. if she did. a line N may appear. Notice that the annotation for line 3 is CD.) Conditional Derivation Rule: If R appears on an accessible There are now two rules that allow canceling of “SHOW”: the DD rule and the CD rule. Well. nevertheless. (Annotation: CD appears on the canceled SHOW line. and there is no harm in having an extra assumption available. because the cases where it is not needed are relatively rare. But either she is in her room.Introductory Logic *. they may be made only in connection with the attempt to derive something of an appropriate form. Here is the first: CD assumption rule: Immediately after a line of the form SHOW N÷R . We need two rules to justify this procedure.

SHOW P P P You may at first think that we can complete this derivation immediately by using w-Exploitation. but only that it is true if the assumption is.* . In this procedure. 97 . In reasoning on the basis of such an assumption we cannot conclude that something established on the basis of an assumption is true.))))))))))))))- We can best explain this diagram by working through an example. called indirect derivation (sometimes also called reductio ad absurdum or proof by contradiction). In order to complete our derivation system. Suppose we wish to complete this derivation: 1. Indirect derivation also involves subderivations and assumptions. we make an assumption and show that it leads to a contradiction. D1. * ** * * **! * * * .16 It is common to make a supposition (assumption) and reason on the basis of it. Recall the diagram for w-Exploitation: wE N w R 16 NwR The reader will recognize that this argument can be translated. * ~N * * SHOW ! * * +)))))))))). P w ~Q 2. which is perhaps more common in mathematics than in ordinary reasoning. we need one more derivation procedure. Q 3. We then conclude that our assumption must be false. with a suitable interpretation. into that of the sample derivation we completed above. Here is how the procedure works in a diagram: ID SHOW N +)))))))))))))). but we cannot.)))))))))).Derivations I room.

3. but it isn’t. 1.” for “Assumption for Indirect Derivation. 4. To do that we have that in our sample derivation. We may not know yet exactly which sentences will be involved in this contradiction. P w ~Q Q SHOW P ~P SHOW ! P P AID Line 5 is a reminder that we seek a contradiction. 3. 6. 2. Now we can exploit our assumption. It can appear in some places where sentences would appear. P w ~Q Q SHOW P ~P P P AID w-Exploitation. 4. we want to have something of the form N on one line and ~N on another. so we cannot enter any of them in a “SHOW” line. wE We now have a contradiction: the “Q” on accessible line 2 is 98 . So to remind ourselves that we seek a contradiction)any old contradiction)we use “!” in place of a sentence in the show line: 1. so we cannot use - The annotation here is “AID. “~P:” 1. 5. We don’t first assume the negation of what we are trying to show. it’s a pseudo-sentence. The “!” looks as though it were a sentence in L1. 2. but it’s just there to remind us of the contradiction. So let us use indirect derivation. 2. 4. 5. that is.” Now we want to try to derive a contradiction. P w ~Q Q SHOW P ~P SHOW ! ~Q P P AID 1. 3.Introductory Logic ~N )))))) ~R )))))) R N w-Exploitation requires that one premise be a disjunction and the other premise must have a “~” as its main connective. 4.

SHOW P +)))))))))))))). 4. and then box and cancel. we will use the following pseudo-inference rule: !I N ~N ))) ! This is a pseudo-inference rule because we are not really inferring anything: “!” is not a sentence of L1. 2. 2. 3. !I Now we are in a position to cancel the “SHOW” on line 3 and box subsequent lines: 1. Q 3. but just a way of indicating that we have succeeded in deriving a contradiction. * ! * . P w ~Q Q SHOW P ~P SHOW ! +))))))))))). 4. To mark the fact that we have found a contradiction. P P AID DD 1.Derivations I explicitly contradicted by the “~Q” on line 6. 5. 6. wE 2. 6.))))))))1. 4. wE We need an annotation for line 7. 4. 5. 4. * ~Q * 7. * ! * . we enter a “!” on the next line. 3. * ~Q * 7.)))))))))))1. P w ~Q 2. 6. To fit in with the pattern that is developing. *~P * P P ID AID 99 . P P AID 1. The annotation requires citing the two earlier lines and adding “!I:” P w ~Q Q SHOW P ~P SHOW ! +)))))))).

&I 4. SHOW N. *SHOW ! * * +)))))))). Assumptions may be made only immediately after show lines. ~N may be assumed. Also.* . (Annotation: ID appears on the canceled “SHOW” line. we will always make it when we seek to complete a derivation by indirect derivation. *SHOW P * *+))))))). &E . CD and ID. **P * * *. After any line SHOW N. !I.))))))))))))))DD 1. However.Introductory Logic 5. we need two new rules: one to justify the assumption in line 4.* . 4. 6. SHOW P ÷ P +))))))))))). notice that the assumption in the indirect derivation is. 2. * *~Q * * 7.) Indirect Derivation Rule: If “!” appears on a line and the most recent “SHOW” line is not “SHOW !”. wE 2. the “SHOW” may be canceled and subsequent lines boxed. here is a derivation that shows this: 1. * * ! * * * . direct derivation is used instead of indirect derivation.)))))))))))100 CD ACD DD 2. After a line of the form. * 4. optional. are necessary to provide derivations of what are called theorems of D1. and one to justify canceling the “SHOW” in line 3. !I In addition to the pseudo inference rule.))))))). a line ~N may appear.) Note that in the case that the most recent “SHOW” line is “SHOW !”. * 6. The two rules. ID Assumption rule: Immediately after a line of the form. Theorems of D1 are sentences of L1 that can be derived from no premises. *P * 3.)))))))). SHOW N÷R. strictly speaking. “P ÷ P” is a theorem of D1. For instance. **P & P * * 5. All the comments about assumptions are still important. since the cases where the derivation can be completed without it are rare. (Annotation: AID. N may be assumed.

even though there are no premises.17 Indirect derivation may be used to derive theorems that do not have “÷” as their main connective.)))))))))))))))).)))))))))))). but they only make derivations easier. We can. *SHOW ! * *+)))))))))))))))). 101 17 . but the proof of it is beyond the scope of this book. 9. !I 4.18 In Chapter 5 we will introduce additional rules. ****P w ~P * * * * 8. our system has all the rules it needs. * * 5. they don’t enable us to show any arguments valid that can’t be shown valid with the rules we have already introduced.* * 9. **P w ~P * * 10.)))))))). 2. * 4. using these rules. *~(P w ~P) * 3.* * * **. 7. ***~P * * * 6. The reader who studies the derivation rules carefully will note that the lines after line 2 are not actually needed for this derivation. **! * * *. wI 2.Derivations I The assumption makes it possible to get the derivation started. SHOW P w ~P +)))))))))))))))))))). !I With the addition of the three rules involved in indirect derivations. **SHOW P * * **+)))))))))))). section 5. * * * 7. 1.))))))))))))))))))))ID AID DD ID AID DD 5. ***SHOW ! * * * ***+)))))))).* . ****! * * * * ***. 18 We will give a somewhat more rigorous statement of this claim in Chapter 5. wI 2. for example. derive everything we wish to derive.

(In fact.. they can be used incorrectly. and the connectives mentioned in the rules must be the main connectives of the sentences. P ÷ R . as though they were instructions to a computer. &E WRONG!! In line n the “&” is not the main connective of the sentence. H & ~I.) A common error in using rules is forgetting that rules refer to whole lines. ˆ D ø E F w G. a computer can be programmed to check whether the rules have been correctly used.(P & Q) ÷ R n+1. For instance. n. The key to using the rules correctly is to understand that they are to be understood absolutely literally. ˆ ~G ÷ (F & ~I) ˆ J ÷ (K ÷ J) L ÷ (M ÷ N) ˆ (L ÷ M) ÷ (L ÷ N) (O & P) ÷ Q. n+1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 B w C. Similarly. ~P ÷ ~Q ˆ P ~P ÷ P ˆ P ~P ˆ P ÷ Q ~T w V ˆ T ÷ V ~(~W w ~X) ˆ W & X 5: Using Rules Correctly Though the rules of D1 are not complicated. Q n..P & Q. So the &-Exploitation rule cannot be used on line n. you cannot do this: 102 .Introductory Logic Exercises 4-4: Provide derivations showing the following arguments valid. you know that you can do this: n. ˆ ~C ÷ (A w B) D & E. &E But you cannot use the &-Exploitation rule in this manner: n. ˆ O ÷ (P ÷ Q) R w (S & ~S) ˆ R ~P ÷ Q...

wE n+1. n+1. * n+5. For instance. SHOW K +)))))))).. but you must go to a bit more trouble. 5. hence it cannot be inferred using I. *~K * n+4. **~T * * n+6. one sentence must be a disjunction and the other must be one of the disjuncts with a tilde (“~”) in front of it.Derivations I n. consider this attempted derivation: 1. K w ~T..* . n+3. 2.) Another error can arise in complicated derivations. wE WRONG!! According to the w-Exploitation rule.P ÷ Q . **! * * *. ID AID DD n.)))).. !I (In chapter 5 we will learn some simpler ways to get this result. n+4. the “w” is not the main connective of line n+1. (P w R) ÷ Q n. the discussion on p. 3.. *SHOW ! * *+)))).. (cf. the following fragment of a derivation is incorrect: n. But line n+1 doesn’t have a tilde in it at all. using I on line n would give something like “(P ÷ Q) w R” where the whole of line n is one of the disjuncts of the inferred line.. n..) You can infer the sentence on line n+2 from the previous lines. Negation must be treated with care..)))))))). K w ~T. T n+2. n+3.. n+1. n+1. n. 6. wI WRONG!! Again.. For instance. P÷R ~P ÷ ~Q Q SHOW R ~R SHOW ! SHOW P P P P AID 103 . n+1. much less is it one of the disjuncts with a tilde in front of it.. 7. K . 97. T n+2. 4.

!I Now we can box and cancel. **~Q * * 11. ! AID 2. **~Q * * 11. * 10. **! * * *. It is boxed. 5.* . 1. ÷E 3. ÷E 3. but this would be an error! We can only cancel the most recent “SHOW. 3. 6. 10 !I WRONG!! P P P AID ID AID DD 2. P÷R ~P ÷ ~Q Q SHOW R ~R SHOW ! SHOW P +)))))))))))). 8.Introductory Logic 8. 8. **! * * *.” We must cancel the “SHOW” on line 9 (and also the one on line 7). 7. 4. 8.))))))). !I But this is wrong. !I 3. *SHOW ! * *+))))))). ! 1. and so we cannot use it. P P P AID ID AID DD 2. *~P * 9. 7. We may be tempted to cancel the “SHOW” on line 6. 3. * ~P * 9. * SHOW ! * *+))))))). SHOW ! 10. 8. 10. We must complete the derivation 104 .)))))))))))12. * 10. 8. 6. 2. 4. 5.)))))))* . 10. ÷E 3. 10. 2. ~Q 11. because line 10 is no longer accessible. ~P 9.))))))))))))We might now be tempted to do this: P÷R ~P ÷ ~Q Q SHOW R ~R SHOW ! SHOW P +))))))))))).

÷E 5. &E 1. Exercises 4-5: Find all the mistakes in the following derivations. !I 1. SHOW R +))))))))))))))))). ~P w Q 2.))))). ÷E 1.* * 12. 5. 10. wE 2. 5. 8. so long as they are correct. 7. 5. ~P ÷ ~Q 3. Of course. Sometimes longer derivations are easier to discover than shorter ones. *Q * 9. 1. ***SHOW ! * * * ***+))))). 1. wE 2. M ÷ P 3. 6. **R * * 13. **! * * *. * * * 10 ****~Q * * * * 11 ****! * * * * ***. *P * 10. *~R * 6. *~P * P P P ID 3. *M 8. P & ~Q 4. * 7.))))))))))))). P ÷ R 2. 12. it does not matter how long derivations are. 6. * * 8.))))))))). ÷E 3. !I This correct derivation could be shortened by omitting lines 5. 7.* * * **.* . ÷E 1. SHOW ~M +))))))))))).)))))))))))))))))P P P ID AID DD ID AID DD 2. *Q * * 7. *P * 6. Q 4. wE 105 . *SHOW ! * *+))))))))))))). and 13. and using DD to justify canceling the “SHOW” on line 4. **SHOW P * * **+))))))))). ***~P * * * 9.Derivations I this way: 1.

7. wI 5. P CD ACD ACD 1. *S & M * 6. *! * . 3. SHOW P ÷ (P w Q) +)))))))))))))). wE 4.))))))))))))))9. *~S * 10. R ø S 2. 10. ~R 4. &I 4. 1. &E 1. *Q * 4. !I 3. R 2. *R * 9.)))))))))). &E 7.* . 6. *R * .Introductory Logic 11. 3. CD ACD DD 1. øE 4. 10 !E P P P ID AID 5. *Q & R * 8. *! * . *P * *SHOW P w Q * *+)))))))))). 4. &E 2.))))))))))))))1. &E 4. &I 7. *Q * 6. 8. SHOW ~S & M +))))))))))). *SHOW R * 7. *SHOW Q ÷ R * 5. * **P & P * * **(P & P) w Q * * **Q & P * * **P * * **P w Q * * *. T & M 3. 6. *M * 8. SHOW P ÷ (Q ÷ R) +)))))))))))))). 5.)))))))))))2.)))))))))))1. &E 6. 2. 6. *S * 7. 5. wI 6: Derivation Strategies 106 .

Set goals for yourself. although sometimes it may not be obvious how to carry out this strategy. either as the main conclusion or as part of a subordinate derivation. but it would be complicated. Since we cannot provide a system of mechanical rules for creating derivations. you try another. and the derivations would generally be longer than those we can think up ourselves. similarly. You should never be afraid to start using rules without knowing exactly where you are going.19 although the process of checking derivations for correctness is. Creating a derivation requires ingenuity and thought. Use exploitation rules to derive things from premises and other earlier accessible lines. you will need to use all the premises to derive the conclusion. If one plan isn’t working. Here are some strategy suggestions that may prove useful. It would be possible to create a mechanical procedure for creating derivations in D1.Derivations I The process of creating derivations is not mechanical. Use trial and error. that will help you derive your conclusion. Then complete the subderivations. There is almost no exception to this rule. such a system would not be feasible. To show a conditional. you should always be prepared to go back to the beginning and start over. therefore. but they are helpful when one doesn’t know what to do. Typically you simply try out various things until you see what will work. if you run into a dead end. always assume the antecedent and try to derive the consequent. on this pattern: SHOW N ÷ R N SHOW R ACD This is nearly always the best way to derive a conditional. we must content ourselves with advice)what I shall call strategy suggestions. Typically. 107 19 . Whenever you are trying to derive a conditional. as “SHOW” lines. trying to be systematic and cover all possibilities. If you are stuck. These suggestions will not be as definite as a recipe. In the system for quantificational logic developed later in the book. Derivations other than the simplest are seldom simply written down as you would write down the lines of a truth-table. assume the antecedent and try to derive the consequent.

3. usually you will get the two conditionals you need for that rule by successive subderivations using CD. A ø ~B SHOW ~A w ~B ~(~A w ~B) SHOW ! P AID How shall we derive a contradiction? A little truth-value analysis may help. When you find sentence letters in common. Look for ways to use introduction rules to derive the conclusion (if it is not atomic). 1. look for ways to use exploitation rules on those lines. If we could show this. and sometime ingenuity is required in the use of it. you will nearly always use øI. try to derive both conjuncts and use &I. Look for sentence letters in common between available lines. hence it must imply that they are both true. assume the negation of what you seek and try to use ID. Lots of derivations use ID. 108 . Let us try to get “A” from line 3. If your conclusion is a biconditional. 1. Consider the following derivation. A ø ~B 2. This is a very common strategy when trying to derive a disjunction. We will set this as a subordinate goal. Line 3 says that neither “A” nor “B” is false. When you can’t see what else to do. 2. we could use it with line 1 and ø-Exploitation. If your conclusion is a conjunction. and since no obvious strategy suggests itself for getting “A. this may suggest ways to proceed.Introductory Logic it is a good idea to check which premises you have not used. and see whether exploitation rules can be used on the premises you have not yet used. you may see how to use exploitation rules. Or you may see what you need to derive to complete the derivation. for instance. Hence we will have to use indirect derivation. In particular. if there are useful-looking earlier accessible lines of the derivation that you have not used. Similarly. it must imply that “A” is true. SHOW ~A w ~B P We might hope to get to the conclusion using w-Introduction. So this looks like a promising line. but a quick check with a truth table will show that neither ~A nor ~B follows from line 1.” we will try indirect derivation. 4.

8.* . A ø ~B 2. **~A w ~B * * 12. * **~A w ~B * * **! * * *. 3.* . 7. 9. 5. *~(~A w ~B) * * 4. AøB SHOW ~A w ~B ~(~A w ~B) SHOW ! SHOW A ~A SHOW ! P AID AID Now it is easy to get our contradiction by wI: 1. **SHOW A * * **+)))))))))))). 6. we can use line 1 and finish the derivation: 1. A ø ~B SHOW ~A w ~B ~(~A w ~B) SHOW ! SHOW A +)))))))))))))). 3. 11. ***~A 7. 3. *SHOW ! *+)))))))))))))))). * * * 8. !I 1. !I 109 . 2. ****! * * * * ***. 8. wI 3. ****~A w ~B * * * * 9.)))))))). 2. !I With “A” available.))))))))))))))))))))P ID AID DD ID AID DD 6. 7. 5. wI 3. SHOW ~A w ~B +)))))))))))))))))))). 5. * 5. *~A * *SHOW ! * *+)))))))))).* * * **.)))))))))))). I 3. * * * * * 6.Derivations I 1. 6. 4. ***SHOW ! * * * ***+)))))))).)))))))))))))))). 7. **! * * *. 6E 10.))))))))))))))P AID AID DD 6. **~B * * 11.* * 10. 4.)))))))))).

B ÷ M. Exercises 4-6: Provide derivations showing the following valid: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ~P ÷ (S w T). ˆ P ÷ Q ~~P. ˆ L 110 . ~S & ~T. ~H ÷ ~R ˆ M B w H.Introductory Logic This derivation is somewhat difficult. ˆ ~P ÷ Q A w B. ~C ÷ L. P w Q . ~(~K w ~R). but with practice you will be able to discover such derivations. ˆ P ÷ Q ~(P ø Q). ˆ B w A (K & H) ÷ ~R. H ÷ M. ˆ S ÷ T ~P. ˆ ~~P P ÷ Q. ˆ P ø Q ~P w Q . ˆ R ~(S & ~T). Q ÷ R. ˆ ~Q ÷ ~P P ÷ R. ˆM C ÷ L. ˆ P P. ˆ P P & Q.

*~~P * n+2. SHOW ~P +)))))))))))))))). Derived rules provide short cuts: they enable us to do in one step what would otherwise require many steps. * * * * * * * n+6. ** Q * * n+8. k. * n+3. !I This sequence of steps comes up often enough that we will find it handy to abbreviate it.” The name is traditional. ÷E k. *** ~P * * * n+5. ****! ***.. ** ! * * *. n+1. 111 20 .* * n+7. * * n+4. n+4. here is a common sequence of steps in a derivation: P÷Q ~Q .)))))))))))). * SHOW ! * *+)))))))))))). In this section we will learn some derived rules for D1. we shall review some general questions about derivations. !I j. One way to do this is to introduce a derived rule of inference. n+3. Finally.* ..Derivations II Chapter 5: Derivations II In this chapter we will learn additional rules to make derivations simpler. *** SHOW ! * * * ***+)))). ID AID DD ID AID DD n+1. We will also learn how to use derivations to show sets of sentences inconsistent and pairs of sentences equivalent.20 “Modus Tollens” is Latin for “the method of denying. We shall call this rule Modus Tollens.* * * **. 1: Derived Rules Modus Tollens is a derived rule of inference.))))))))))))))))j. ** SHOW P * * **+)))))))). n+7.)))). n.)))))))). For instance.

)))))))))P P P DD 1. *SHOW Q *+))))))). 3.))))))). 4.Introductory Logic here is its diagram: MT N÷R ~R ))))))) ~N This rule corresponds to our ordinary ways of reasoning. MT 2. R . * 3. Because CD requires that we obtain the consequent of the conditional on the last line of the subderivation. P CD ACD DD 1. 2. 5. 3. We can use this rule in derivations like this one: 1. 5. but occasionally it is helpful when using CD. it can be handy to have the Repetition rule in cases where we already have the consequent before starting the CD derivation. M÷S MwE ~S SHOW E +))))))))). then I can conclude that the battery is not dead. *P * * 4. **Q * * *. but I also know that the car does not fail to crank when I turn the key. such as this simple one: Q SHOW P ÷ Q +))))))))))). Its diagram looks like this: R M )))))) M You might well wonder when we would need to use a rule like this. * E * . 3. wE Repetition is another derived rule of inference. we seldom do. When I know that if the battery is dead the car will fail to crank when I turn the ignition key. 2. *~M * 6. It allows us to repeat any earlier accessible line. In fact.* 112 1.

P i. *A * *SHOW C * *+)))))))). Without the rule.. A ÷ B 2. 5. it would always be possible to use steps like the following to repeat an earlier line: i. it merely makes derivations shorter (and a bit easier). The traditional rule that allows us to do this is called hypothetical syllogism. P & P n+1. 4. 7. 2. A÷B B÷C SHOW A ÷ C +)))))))))))). 6. * **B * * **C * * *. SHOW A ÷ C P P Now we can complete this proof easily. P . Sometimes we wish to derive a conditional from two others in the following pattern: 1.* . B ÷ C 3.)))))))))))- Derivations II This rule does not enable us to complete any derivations that could not be completed without it.))))))))))))P P CD ACD DD 1.. thus: 1.. ÷E 2. 7. &I n. &E The hypothetical syllogism rule is another derived rule. its diagram looks like this: HS N ÷ R R÷2 N÷2 ))))))) 113 . ÷E But it is handy to be able to avoid the conditional derivation in this case and simply get line 3 directly from lines 1 and 2. Like the Modus Tollens rule. 4. n.)))))))). 3.

W w (G & N) W÷N SHOW N +))))))))))))))))))))))). I also know that if he is sleeping.Introductory Logic Using this rule. SHOW A ÷ C +))))))))). 2. If you provided a derivation for Exercise 13 from Exercises 4-6. Another handy derived rule is called Separation of Cases (also sometimes called Constructive Dilemma). I can certainly conclude that he will not wish to be disturbed. &E 1. and also how inconvenient it would be to do so. B ÷ C 3.* * *. the derivation above could be done in four lines: 1. The general form of the Separation of Cases rule looks like this: SC NwR N÷2 R÷2 ))))) 2 This rule corresponds to ordinary inference patters. *SHOW (G & N) ÷ N * *+))))))))))))))))))). A ÷ B 2.)))))))))))))))))))))))P P DD CD ACD DD 5. he will not wish to be disturbed. HS There are two forms of the Separation of Cases rule. *A ÷ C * . 4. We can use the rule in derivations such as this one: 1. you will see how you could do without this rule. 4. and if he is studying. 6. * **G & N * * **SHOW N * * **+))))))))))))))).* *N * . 8. 2. 2. 3. 7. 5.)))))))))P P DD 1. * * ***N * * * **.))))))))))))))))))). SC 114 .))))))))))))))). 4. Suppose I know that Alonzo is either studying or sleeping. he will not wish to be disturbed.

* * 12. and carrying it out is easy.))))))))))))))))).* D * . 4. &E 4. we have a second form of SC which we may call SC2: SC2 N÷R ~N ÷ R R )))))) If you supplied a derivation for exercise number 14 of Exercises 46.** SHOW D **+))))))))))))). he should be dismissed. Therefore. SC2 can also 115 . he is culpable and should be dismissed. * * 7. ***D * * * **. 5. 10. 9. if he didn’t know.Derivations II A special case of SC arises when the first premise is of the form N w ~N. 1.))))))))))))).)))))))))))))))))))))P P DD CD ACD DD 1.))))))))))))))))). it need not be explicitly present in order to use SC. ~A ÷ (I & D) 3. ***G & D * * * 8. he is incompetent and should be dismissed.* * *. The basic strategy)using CD to get the two conditionals needed for SC2)is not difficult to discover. *SHOW ~A ÷ D * *+))))))))))))))))). &E CD ACD DD 2.* * *.* 9.))))))))))))). * 10.***D * * * **. If the accountant knew about the embezzlement. * 5. in fact. ÷E 7. you will have a good idea how we could do without this rule.* 14. §4). and how inconvenient it would be to do so. This rule corresponds to ordinary reasoning as well. SHOW D +))))))))))))))))))))).***I & D * * * 13. Since this is a theorem of D1 (we proved it at the end of Chapter 4. **SHOW D * * **+))))))))))))). SC2 This derivation looks more complicated than it is. *SHOW A ÷ D * *+))))))))))))))))).** ~A * * * * 11. ÷E 12. A ÷ (G & D) 2. **A * * 6.

n.)))))))))))))))This new form of indirect derivation will not enable us to complete any derivations we could not complete without it.. SHOW ~Q ÷ [(P ÷ Q) w (P ÷ ~Q)] . Here is a sketch showing how this strategy might work in this case: 1. * ** * * ** * * **! * * * . For. P ÷ (S & ~S) 2. we could always achieve the same result by a more cumbersome method. as the following derivation illustrates.) Its diagram looks like this: ID SHOW ~N +))))))))))))))). n.. Our new form of the rule will allows us to drop the tilde to form the assumption. “AID” in this case. consider this theorem: 1. we shall add a second form of indirect derivation. (We will still use the annotation. SHOW (P ÷ Q) w (P 6 ~Q) 2. (P ÷ Q) w (P ÷ Q) 2.))))))))))* . For instance.Introductory Logic provide a handy way to tackle derivations that don’t present any obvious strategy.. This is so even if that sentence already begins with a tilde. SHOW Q ÷ [(P ÷ Q) w (P ÷ ~Q)] . In the form we are familiar with. 1. SC2 The reader should have no difficulty finishing the derivation using this strategy.. Finally. in this case the assumption will have to have two tildes. * N * * SHOW ! * * +)))))))))). SHOW ~P 116 P ID . SHOW (P ÷ Q) w (P ÷ ~Q) It is not obvious how to tackle this derivation. but sometimes one can choose a strategic sentence letter and use SC2. the assumption we make for indirect derivation must consist of the sentence on the preceding “SHOW” line with a tilde (“~”) in front of it.

*** SHOW ! * * * ***+))))). ** ~S * * 12. (Did you notice that SC was also used in this proof?) Although it may seem as though our system becomes more complicated with more rules. and they offer us additional strategies for constructing derivations.* . which contradicts the assumption that p is the largest prime. ** S & ~S * * 10. Euclid’s famous proof that there is no largest prime begins with the assumption that there is a largest prime. Since the assumption that there is a largest prime leads to a contradiction.))))))))). and it is not divisible by any number other than 1 that is less than p (since division by any such number leaves a remainder of 1).))))))))))))). 6. 11. or else is divisible by some prime number less than itself but larger than p. it must be false. say p. The proof proceeds by considering the number we get when we take the product of p with all the numbers less than it and add 1 to this product. it is not the case that there is a largest prime. This number is obviously bigger than p. &E 9. Hence this number is either itself a prime larger than p. * SHOW ! * *+))))))))))))). &E 10. Exercises 5-1: Indicate which of the sentences can be derived from the given sentences with the given rule (using no other rules): 117 .))))). !I 1. it actually is easier to construct derivations with the larger set of rules. *** ~P * * * 7. * * * 8.* * 9. * 5. The derivations are shorter. *~~P * 4. 5. ** SHOW P * * **+))))))))). because we have the shortcuts of the new rules.+))))))))))))))))). For instance. ** S * * 11. ÷E 9. !I Some well-known proofs in mathematics use this version of the rule. * * 6. 3. ****! * * * * ***. Either way there is a prime larger than p.* * * **. that is. ** ! * * *.)))))))))))))))))- Derivations II AID DD ID AID DD 3.

using Separation of Cases (second form. ˆ W ø O K ÷ S. W & ~M. 5. 10. 14.Introductory Logic 1. ˆ S ø R S & T. ~S. ˆ ~(T w R) P ÷ (S & T). using Modus Tollens. 9. ˆ ~K L ÷ (S w G). ˆ F ÷ R Q w L. From J ÷ (R & S). D. ~J ÷ (R & S). ~F ÷ G. Y ÷ Q. S w R. and ~C. From E w ~F. ~R & (D ÷ Q). C ÷ ~D. P & ~S. 7. 6. Q ÷ T. ˆ P ÷ J R ÷ I. R w P. L ÷ T. 11. ˆ ~(L & ~G) 2: Showing Inconsistency and Equivalence with Derivations Derivations may be used to show sentences equivalent or sets 118 . From A ÷ B. ~B. (S & T) ÷ J. E ÷ H. ˆ T P ÷ (D w Y). ~T ÷ L. (Q w R) ÷ S. F ÷ H. ˆ M ÷ S R w M. E ÷ G. ˆ Q T ÷ (W ø O). and G w H using Separation of Cases (first form. 12. Q & ~N. you may infer: a) ~A b) ~~D c) A d) ~C e) ~~A f) D 2. 13. 8. L ÷ (W ø O). I ÷ S. S ÷ R. ~S w R. SC) you may infer: a) G b) H c) ~F w E d) ~H 3. SC2) you may infer: a) R b) S c) S & R d) R & S Use the new rules in constructing correct derivations that show the following valid: 4. ~S. ˆ ~(Q w R) (T w R) ÷ N.

**SHOW ~P w Q * * **+))))))))))))))). P DD CD ACD DD 1. but derivations can also be used to show sentences equivalent or sets of sentences inconsistent. 2.* 8. 8. *P * 4. * * 6. complete the following two derivations: 1. ***~P w Q * * * **.* * *.))))))))))))))). ÷E 6. 2. So far we have only used derivations to show arguments valid. *SHOW ~P ÷ (~P w Q) * *+))))))))))))))))))). * 1. That is. To show N is equivalent to R. To show two sentences equivalent. wI 3. ***Q * * * 7. We can show “P ÷ Q” equivalent to “~P w Q” by the following two derivations: P÷Q SHOW ~P w Q +))))))))))))))))))))))). SHOW R P 1. P CD ACD DD 119 . **P * * 5. **SHOW ~P w Q * * **+))))))))))))))).)))))))))))))))))))))))1. wI CD ACD DD 9. we derive them from each other. * 9. * ~P w Q * . SC2 ~P w Q SHOW P ÷ Q +)))))))))))))))))))). 3.))))))))))))))). 3.))))))))))))))))))). SHOW N P Once you have completed these two derivations. N 2. * * 11. Let us do an example. * SHOW P ÷ (~P w Q) * *+))))))))))))))))))). *SHOW Q * *+)))))))))))))))).* 12. **~P * * 10. * 4. R 2. 4. ***~P w Q * * * **.* * *.))))))))))))))))))).Derivations II of sentences inconsistent. you have shown the two sentences equivalent.

* * 6. *SHOW ~P ÷ Q * *+))))))))))))). we wish to show the following set inconsistent: PwQ ~(~P ÷ Q) To show this set inconsistent. 6. 5.* * *. ***~P * * * 7. To show a set of sentences inconsistent. 4.))))))))))))).* *! * P P DD CD ACD DD 1. 7.))))))))))))))))))))- ID AID DD 3. 6. 3. 8. 2. The second of these is fairly straightforward. these derivations show that the two sentences are equivalent. **Q * * *.)))))))).e. * * ***Q * * * **. 120 PwQ ~(~P ÷ Q) SHOW ! +))))))))))))))))). 4.* * 9. a contradiction) from premises all of which are in the set to be shown inconsistent. you must derive “!” (i. though later in this chapter we will learn how to simplify it even further.* * * **..* . we must complete the following derivation: 1. 5. 2.)))))))))))). wE The first of the derivations further illustrates the use of SC2. for instance. ***SHOW ! * * * ***+)))))))). 5. !I . 3. PwQ ~(~P ÷ Q) SHOW ! P P A promising strategy here is to use premise 1 to derive the negation of premise 2. thus: 1. Suppose. Together. * **~P * * **SHOW Q * * **+))))))))).)))))))))))))))). !I 1. wE 2. **SHOW ~~P * * **+)))))))))))). ****! * * * * ***.Introductory Logic 5.))))))))). * * * 8.

H & R (M w W) ÷ C. 16.)))))))))))))))))- Derivations II Exercises 5-2: Show the following pairs of sentences equivalent by deriving each member of the pair from the other. ~C & J.. 18. 23. They license replacement of whole sentences on a line or of sentential parts of sentences on a line by equivalent sentences. the Double Negation Replacement rule. So far. Q ÷ P M ø T. 26. ~R & Q. P ÷ (Q & R). and vice versa. This rule will allow us to replace any of the sentences on the left below with the corresponding sentence to its 121 . 19. 15. 21. The Diagram of this rule looks like this: DN N :: ~~N This rule licenses us to replace any instance of the left side of the double colon (“::”) by the corresponding instance of the right hand side. 24. Replacement rules are different. Let’s see how such rules work by considering an example. ~W ÷ ~J 3: Replacement Rules: Replacement rules are a different sort of rule. 25. and they can work backwards as well as forwards. ~A ø H. all our rules have operated on whole lines of a derivation and have allowed inferences in one direction only. M ÷ ~T R ÷ (H ÷ A). M w T. 17. 22. 20. QøX P P÷Q ~(P w Q) PwQ M w (N & P) Z÷U B ÷ (B & Y) (Q ÷ X) & (X ÷ Q) ~~P ~P w Q ~P & ~Q QwP (M w N) & (M w P) ~U ÷ ~Z B÷Y Show the following inconsistent by deriving “!” from them.

For a sample derivation using this rule. SHOW P ÷ Q +)))))))))))).* . Some replacement rules are useful for deriving things from lines beginning with a tilde. *P * 4. 3. *SHOW Q * *+)))))))). *~P * . When a premise or earlier line of a derivation begins with a tilde and is more complex than the 122 . and they license us to derive new lines by replacing any line or part of a line that is an instance of one of the two forms by the corresponding instance of the other form. because line 3 is not a tilde followed by one of the disjuncts of line 1. 4. *~~Q * 5. * 5. DN 1. 4. as in this simple derivation: 1. wE Steps 5 and 6 are common ones.))))))))))))P CD ACD DD 3.Introductory Logic right (or vice versa): P P ÷ ~~Q ~~(P w Q) P ø (N w S) ~(R ÷ J) ~~P P÷Q PwQ P ø (~~N w S) ~~~(R ÷ J) We can do this because the sentences on each side are truth-functionally equivalent to each other. We often do the same with MT. They give us pairs of equivalent statement forms. **Q * * *. MT All replacement rules work like this. Q 3. DN 1. But we use DN to get a line that we can use with wE and line 1.)))))))). **~~P * * 6. we can simplify the derivation in the previous section. SHOW ~P +))))))))). P ÷ ~Q 2.)))))))))P P DD 2. 5. we cannot get line 6 from line 1 and 3 directly using wE. ~P w Q 2. 1.

we often need to do a round-about indirect derivation to derive anything from the line. ~(F w Q) 2. Here is a simple example: 1.)))))))). !I A pair of replacement rules will help us shorten such derivations. SHOW ~F +))))))))). * ~F & ~Q * 4. *SHOW ! * *+)))))))). 5. 3.Derivations II negation of a sentence letter. SHOW ~F +)))))))))))). **F w Q * * 6.))))))))))))P ID AID DD 3. They are usually known as De Morgan’s Laws. 123 . &E De Morgan’s Laws are of no help when dealing with conditionals or biconditionals. wI 1. *F * 4.)))))))))P DD 1. 3. * ~F * . **! * * *.21 and their diagrams look like this: DeM ~(N w R) :: ~N & ~R ~(N & R) :: ~N w ~R Using De Morgan’s Laws we can shorten the preceding derivation to two simple steps: 1. ~(F w Q) 2. DeM 3. * 5.* . for them we introduce two additional replacement rules: ~÷ ~ø ~(M ÷ R) :: N & ~R ~(N ø R) :: ~N ø R We can illustrate both of these in the following derivation: 21 After the British mathematician and logician Augustus De Morgan (1806-1871).

Introductory Logic 1. ~(U ÷ D) 2. ~(D ø P) 3. SHOW P +))))))))), 4. *U & ~D * 5. *~D * 6. *~D ø P * 7. * P * .)))))))))-

P P DD 1, ~÷ 4, &E 2, ~ø 5, 6, øE

Some replacement rules reflect fundamental properties of the logical operators. You are probably familiar with the fact that addition is commutative; we might express that fact thus: x+y=y+x A similar property is the basis for the following three replacement rules, which we will call commutativity: Com

N & R :: R & N N w R :: R w N N ø R :: R ø N

Note that there is no replacement rule of commutativity for “÷.” (Why not?) We can illustrate all three commutativity rules in the following simple derivation: 1. [(B w Q) & M] ø W 2. SHOW W ø [M & (Q w B)] +))))))))))))))))))))), 3. * W ø [(B w Q) & M] * 4. * W ø [M & (B w Q)] * 5. * W ø [M & (Q w B)] * .)))))))))))))))))))))P DD 1, Com 3, Com 4, Com

Another group of three rules may be called Associativity, again by analogy with the familiar arithmetical property: Assoc.

N & (R & 2) :: (N & R) & 2 N w (R w 2) :: (N w R) w 2 N ø (R ø 2) :: (N ø R) ø 2

We can illustrate them in this simple derivation: 124

(G & A) & F (G ø F) ø ~R (R w M) w H SHOW M w H +))))))))))))))), 5. *G & (A & F) * 6. *G * 7. *G ø (F ø ~R) * 8. *F ø ~R * 9. *F * 10.*~R * 11.*R w (M w H) * 12.*M w H * .)))))))))))))))-

1. 2. 3. 4.

P P P DD 1, Assoc 5, &E 2, Assoc 6, 7, øE 1, &E 8, 9, øE 3, Assoc 10, 11, E

Derivations II

Next we have the distributive rules. You are familiar with the arithmetic fact that multiplication distributes over addition: x (y + z) = xy + xz Similarly, disjunction distributes over conjunction, and conjunction distributes over disjunction. Dist

N & (R w 2) :: (N & R) w (N & 2) N w (R & 2) :: (N w R) & (N w 2)

We can illustrate this in the following derivation: ~(P & Q) P & (Q w R) (P & R) ÷ [S w (T & M)] SHOW S w T +)))))))))))))))))), 5. *(P & Q) w (P & R) * 6. *P & R * 7. *S w (T & M) * 8. *(S w T) & (S w M) * 9. *S w T * .))))))))))))))))))1. 2. 3. 4. P P P DD 1, Dist 1, 5, wE 3, 6, ÷E 7, Dist 8, &E

We also have rules representing fundamental equivalences involving the connectives. We have pointed out before that “N ÷ R” is most accurately translated “Either not N or R.” The following two rules reflect that:

125

Introductory Logic

÷w

N ÷ R :: ~N w R ~N ÷ R :: N w R

The second of these rules is the basis for a new strategy for deriving disjunctions: assume the negation of one of the disjuncts and try to derive the other. We can illustrate it in this derivation: 1. ~(P ø Q) 2. SHOW P w Q +)))))))))))))))))), 3. * SHOW ~P ÷ Q * *+)))))))))))))), * 4. **~P * * 5. **SHOW Q * * **+)))))))))), * * 6. ***~P ø Q * * * 7. ***Q * * * **.))))))))))- * * *.))))))))))))))- * 8. * P w Q * .))))))))))))))))))P DD CD ACD DD 1, ~ø 4, 6, øE 3, ÷w

One final rule is included because it is traditional. The contrapositive of a conditional is the conditional you get by exchanging antecedent and consequent and negating both. Since the contrapositive of a conditional is equivalent to it, we add the following Contraposition rule: Ctr

N ÷ R :: ~R ÷ ~N

We can illustrate the use of this rule with the following derivation: 1. ~(~H & V) 2. SHOW V ÷ H +)))))))))))), 3. *~~H w ~V * 4. *~H ÷ ~V * 5. * V ÷ H * .))))))))))))P DD 1, DeM 3, ÷w 4, Ctr

The addition of all these replacement rules to our stock of rules does not enable us to complete any derivations that can not be completed using only the basic rules of Chapter 4, but this fact is not at all easy to prove. It is a consequence of two facts. The first 126

Derivations II is that the replacement rules are sound, that is, they can never lead us to infer a false sentence from a true one. You can probably convince yourself that this is true by verifying with truth tables that all the replacements involve replacing sentential parts of sentences by equivalent parts. (Check with a truth table to verify the equivalence if necessary.) Hence only valid arguments have derivations using the new rules. The second fact is quite difficult to prove, and we will not attempt to prove it. It is that the rules of Chapter 4 are complete, that is they enable us to provide derivations for every valid argument formulated in L1. There is more about this in Section 6 of this chapter, but its proof is beyond the scope of this book. Exercises 5-3: Show the following valid: 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. P w ~L, L & (Z ÷ ~P), ˆ ~~L & ~Z R ÷ (~M ÷ ~E), M ø S, E & R, ˆ S (H w T) ÷ ~S, S & (T w Q), ˆ ~H & Q (O & L) ÷ (T w K), P w (~T & ~K), ~P & L, ˆ ~(O w P) ~(C ÷ T), H w T, ˆH (M ÷ Q) ÷ S, ~(T ÷ S), ˆ T & ~Q S ÷ (A ø N), Q w (~A ø N), ~Q & (~S ÷ T), ˆ T (B ø K) ÷ R, ~(R w K), ˆ B (P & Q) ÷ (H w X), G ÷ (Q & P), ˆ G ÷ (X w H) S ÷ (~P & Q), S ÷ (~Q w P), ˆ S ÷ H A w (B w C), ˆ (C w A) w B M w [(R & H) & K], ˆ M w [(K & R) & H] B w (~ J & W), (J & W) w (J & H), ˆ B M ÷ (Z w W), ~K w (G w Z), K, ˆ M ÷ [Z w (W & G)] ~I ÷ ~(E w ~X), ˆ I w X (C w R) ÷ N, S ÷ (~C ÷ R), ˆ S ÷ N P ÷ (Q ÷ R), ~R w S, P & (S ÷ ~Q), ˆ ~Q (~H ÷ ~R) ÷ (M w T), S ÷ (R÷ H), ˆS ÷ (M w T) 4: Derivation Strategies We will have no mechanical recipe for constructing derivations. Derivations are constructed by trial and error and by using ingenuity. Although we have no mechanical method for constructing derivations, some general advice is useful for the 127

Introductory Logic student. First, don’t be afraid to start a derivation without seeing how it will end. In all but the simplest derivations, you generally start out doing promising things without knowing how the derivation will be finished. You start off in a promising direction and keep going until you either complete the derivation or come to a dead end where there is nothing else to do. If you reach a dead end, you go back to an earlier point at which you could have tried something different and try that different thing. Finding a correct derivation often requires erasing or crossing out and starting over. Scrap paper and a pencil with a good eraser are useful tools. Second, be sure to try all possible routes to a complete derivation before giving up. In logic, as elsewhere in life, a good deal of problem-solving is simply a matter of systematically trying all the possibilities. Third, if you are stuck in the middle of a derivation, look around at all the accessible lines for rules that you can use. Look for lines that have sentence letters in common to see whether they can somehow be useful together. Following this advice requires familiarity with the rules, of course. This comes mainly with practice. Fourth, remember that in most derivations you will need to use all the premises. When stuck in the middle of a derivation, check to see that you have in fact made use of all the premises. If not, try to find a way to use those that are as yet unused. Guidance in completing derivations comes from setting goals. When one begins a derivation, one automatically has one goal: it is given by the first “SHOW” line of the derivation. But it is also useful to set up subsidiary goals. For instance, consider the following derivation: 1. ~D & ~W 2. SHOW D ø W P

It is reasonable to expect that the derivation will be completed by using øI. To use this rule, you will need to have available “D ÷ W” and “W ÷ D.” So it is plausible to set these as subsidiary goals, and to enter “SHOW” lines for each goal: 1. ~D & ~W 2. SHOW D ø W 3. SHOW D ÷ W 128 P

.. SHOW W ÷ D

Derivations II

We have not entered a line number for the second “SHOW” line, and we have left a space above it because we need to complete the first subderivation, beginning with “SHOW D ÷ W,” before we begin the second one. The reader should have no difficulty completing the derivation. Goals are often achieved using the introduction rules for the connectives. If you are trying to derive a non-atomic sentence, you will often use the introduction rule for the main connective of the sentence. Sometimes it will be helpful to set subsidiary goals using “SHOW” lines. Here are some suggestions: To derive something of the form N ÷ R, assume the antecedent, N, and use CD. To derive something of the form N & R, try to derive both N and R and use &I. To derive something of the form N ø R, derive N ÷ R and R ÷ N and use øI. Derive each of the conditionals using CD. Suggestions for goals of the form N w R and ~N are more complicated. Sometimes N w R can be inferred using wI, but often not. You can check whether wI can be used by doing a quick truth-table check to see whether either disjunct alone follows from the premises. If so, try to derive that disjunct and use wI. If neither disjunct alone follows, you will have to derive the disjunction either by an indirect derivation or by use of the ÷w replacement rule. For instance, suppose we wish to complete the following: 1. ~T ÷ M 2. SHOW M w T P

First we check to see whether either “M” or “T” follows from the premise. But since the premise can be true when “M” is false, and also when “T” is false, neither alone can be derived from the premise, so we cannot expect to complete the derivation using wI. If we use an Indirect derivation, however, we can complete it thus: 1. ~T ÷ M P 129

÷w 3. **~M * * 7. it is simpler to derive the conclusion directly. *SHOW ! * *+)))))))). *SHOW ~M ÷ T * *+))))))))))).))))))). **~T * * 8. 4. ***~~T * * * 7. the choice between them is a matter of taste.))))))))))P DD 1. 3. **~M & ~T * * 6. ~T ÷ M 2. We will show how to do a derivation in several ways to illustrate this: 130 . 3.))))))))))).* 8. &E 5. ***T * * * **. &E 1. 8. MT 7.))))))))))))- ID AID DD 3.* * *. Conclusions beginning with "~" can always be derived using indirect derivations. SHOW M w T +))))))))))))))). !I Alternatively. *T w M * 4. SHOW M w T +)))))))))). ÷E 6. **! * * *. *M w T * . 3. however. * 5. Sometimes. DN 3. Com P DD CD ACD DD 1. * 4. **~M * * 5. * * 6. ÷w Either method is as good as the other.* . SHOW M w T +)))))))))))). if it is contained in the premises and you can get it using exploitation rules.)))))))))))))))or even more simply: 1. we can complete the derivation using the ÷w rule: 1. DeM 5. *M w T * . **M * * 9. **SHOW T * * **+))))))).)))))))). *~(M w T) * 4.Introductory Logic 2. 7. ~T ÷ M 2.

!I 1. DeM 6. ÷w 7. 6. * * 8.))))))))))))))))))P P DD ID AID DD 2. DN 1. **SHOW ! * * **+)))))))))). ~(P & Q) w (R ÷ S) P 2. * 6. **R * * 9. &E 9. *~(~R w S) * 4. ~(P & Q) w (R ÷ S) 2.***! * * * **. ÷E 2. **R ÷ S * * 7. &E 9. ÷E 2. *SHOW ~(R ÷ S) * 5. ~(P & Q) w (R ÷ S) 2. R & ~S P 3. The last illustrates the use of the replacement rules. !I 1. *~(R ÷ S) * 5. 8. *~(P & Q) * 1.**~S * * 11. wE P P ID AID DD 4. &E 7.Derivations II 1.* .))))))))))))))))). SHOW ~(P & Q) DD +)))))))))))))))))). **~~(P & Q) * * 7.))))))))))))))))))All three derivations are equally good. SHOW ~(P & Q) +)))))))))))))))))).* 12. **S * * 10. 4. *~~R & ~S * 2. In order to reach goals one must use the rules to infer things from accessible lines. wE . SHOW ~(P & Q) +))))))))))))))))))))). ***S * * * 10. wE 2.**! * * *. * SHOW ! * *+))))))))))))))))). R & ~S 3. Which rules to use depends on what lines are accessible. *+)))))))))))))).)))))))))). 10. In general.)))))))))))))))))))))1. R & ~S 3. ***R * * * 9. DN 5. 10. 4.)))))))))))))). **R ÷ S * * 8.* * *. 6.***~S * * * 11. 8. * 6. 4.*~(P & Q) * . &E 6. *P & Q * 5. 4. the rules one can use on a line depend 131 .

(G ÷ Q) w (S ø R). 52. 51. try to use the line with MT. 50. “÷”. 48.” another sentence is needed to use the exploitation rules. F w G. and “ø. (S ÷ ~Q) ÷ T.Introductory Logic on the main connective of the line. ˆ (R w ~T) ÷ (S ÷ R) B ø ~B. ~B w J. ˆ ~E ÷ (~L w H) T w (B & Q). by starting a subderivation to “SHOW” it. Exercises 5-4 Show the following valid: 45. or in an indirect derivation. then using it will depend on what follows the “~. if the main connective of what follows “~” is ~ & use DN DeM DeM ~÷ ~ø w ÷ ø Using these rules under these circumstances will usually simplify what you have and make it easier to continue the derivation. Q w T. 53. ˆ M & ~Q (P ÷ Q) ÷ R. ~(S w Q). ˆ F & G . ~H ÷ ~T. 46.” If the following sentence is atomic. ˆ H w J ˆ (A ÷ M) w (B ÷ ~M) Q ø ~G. ˆ J ø ~C F ø G. ~(S ÷ Q) ˆR & G Q ÷ S. try to derive one. 49. if necessary. Otherwise. If there is no appropriate accessible line. wE. If the main connective is & Use &E wE ÷E øE w ÷ ø Note that in the cases of “w”. ~(R ø S). 132 L ÷ (E w H). T ÷ (Q w S) ˆ (S & T) w (S & Q) M w (~R & T). If the main connective of a line is “~”. 47.

But most mathematical proofs don’t look that way. **C * * *. 4. 56. 57. Now you may have occasionally presented proofs that you might think looked somewhat like our proofs. If you open a mathematical text or journal. to some extent. for instance. 1. R ÷ ~R. you will usually find proofs given in a more discursive manner. 58. ÷E 133 . ~R ÷ Q. for instance. Q w ~P (P & Q) ÷ R. presents proofs of theorems in a formal style with numbered lines and justifications in a separate column to the right. Usually high school geometry. 6. Natural deduction systems are so-called because they are supposed to model. in paragraphs without numbered lines and justifications. *~A * 5. And even proofs in high school geometry texts do not have SHOW lines and boxes. **~B * * 7. 55. 54. *SHOW C * *+)))))))). A w ~B 2. ~S.Derivations II Show the following pairs of sentences equivalent.)))))))). wE 2. P 5: D1 Derivations and English proofs Derivations in D1 correspond approximately to the way proofs are given in English. ~B ÷ C 3. The system D1 is one of the deductive systems called “natural deduction” systems. as when we are giving proofs of mathematical theorems. Consider.* . SHOW ~A ÷ C +)))))))))))). * 6. the following derivation. (P ÷ Q) ÷ (S & T).))))))))))))P P CD ACD DD 1. for instance. P ÷ (Q ÷ R) K ÷ (N & F) AøB (P ÷ Q) ÷ (P ÷ R) (K ÷ N) & (K ÷ F) (A & B) w (~A & ~B) Show the following sets of sentences inconsistent. We can get an idea of how our derivations relate to proofs we find in mathematics by translating our derivations into English. the way we present logical proofs when we are reasoning correctly and presenting careful arguments for others. 4.

SHOW ~B & ~A +))))))))))))))). B ø A 2. First we show that not-B is true by an indirect proof.” It is traditional to use it to signal the end of proofs. We are to show that if not-A then C.22 In the English version. and try to show C. !I 2. it is typical to label crucial intermediate results for later reference. ***A * * * 8. “quod erat demonstrandum. **SHOW ! * * **+))))))). We want to show that both not-B and not-A are true. with the premise that B if and only if A. *SHOW ~B * *+))))))))))). 4. We assume B and derive a contradiction. Here’s a derivation using indirect derivation. we could present the argument this way.))))))).Introductory Logic In English. taking them to be obvious. **B * * 6. ***! * * * **.* * 9. though in complex mathematical proofs. 4. and so we can’t refer to earlier lines by number. we must have not-B. So assume that notA. But this QED stands for the Latin phrase. * 5. 134 22 . ~A 3. &I In English.)))))))))))))))P P DD ID AID DD 1.))))))))))). since we were given that either A or not-B. it follows that A. we might present this derivation like this. øE 2. QED. 1. Then obviously. **~B & ~A * * *.* . We also don’t number the lines. We are given that either A or not-B and that if not-B then C. 5. we have C. and that A is not true. We are given that B is true if and only if A is.. 7. * * 7.” meaning “which was to be demonstrated. we typically don’t cite the rules we use. But since we’re given that if not-B then C. From B.

Since we’ve shown that if B is true. B is. We are given that either A is false or B is true. * 10. **A * * 6.)))))))))))))))))P P DD CD ACD DD 5. A is and if A is true B is. 1. DN 2. wE CD ACD DD 10.))))))))). Finally. Suppose A is true. Now we show that if B is true.* * *. wE 3. ***B * * * **. QED.))))))))))))). 4.))))))))))))). We have found our contradiction. and that either B is false or A is true. ~A w B 2. So we’ve shown that if A is true B is. 8. 12. We begin by showing that if A is true. * * 7. Suppose B is true. But that together with the premise that not-A yields not-B and not-A. ~B w A 3.Derivations II contradicts the premise that not-A. *SHOW A ÷ B * *+))))))))))))). * * 12. Then it’s false that A is false. A is. We want to show that A is true if and only if B is. we’ve shown that A is true if and only if B is. But since we’re given that either A is false or B is true. **SHOW A * * **+))))))))). A is. B must be true.* * *. **SHOW B * * **+))))))))).))))))))). 9. Then not-B is not true. A must be true. we present a derivation of a biconditional. ***~~B * * * 13. *SHOW B ÷ A * *+))))))))))))). *A ø B * . So we’ve shown that if B is true. so we conclude that not-B. * 5. DN 1. **B * * 11.* 14. ***~~A * * * 8. øI In English. SHOW A ø B +))))))))))))))))).* 9. the argument might look like this. But since we’re given that either not-B is true or A is. ***A * * * **. [Note: a mathematics text would probably omit this last sentence as 135 .

~÷. Our derivation differ in that we use only symbols. B w A. and specifically refer to the rules and the previous steps we employ. A & (B w C). D1 provides a way of showing arguments valid. &E. and ÷w. CD. DD. Com. R. ˆ B A ÷ B. ˆ A ÷ (A & B) A w ~B. and we don’t make use of definitions of terms. ~ø. 61. AID). Dist. Two features of mathematical arguments are not modeled by our logical arguments. wI. 60. and their diagrams are provided. DeM. and the derivation rules. 62. the replacement rules DN. ÷E. It includes the inference rules &I. A comparison of these derivations with their English equivalents will show how natural our derivations are. We would hope that two things would be true. ~C. and ID (both forms).Introductory Logic too obvious to mention. But they have the same overall structure as the arguments we might find in mathematics texts. øE. øI. 59. wE. Exercises 5-5 For each of the following arguments. construct a derivation in D1 and then give an equivalent in English. First we would like to be sure that anytime there is a derivation of a sentence from 136 . Assoc. though if we wanted to complicate our logic we could easily add them. MT. and SC2. sentences equivalent. We don’t refer to previously proved theorems. ˆ A ø B 6: The Deductive System D1 The deductive system D1 includes all the rules we have so far learned and all the derivation rules. set down each step on a separate line. ˆ A ~A & ~B. and sets of sentences inconsistent that is different from the method of truth tables presented in Chapter 3. The rules are stated in the appendix to this chapter.. as well as the associated rules allowing assumptions (ACD. SC.] QED. It is therefore natural to ask what the relation between these two methods is.

no assignment of truth values makes all premises true and the conclusion false). So ÷E will never take us from truths to falsehoods. that it make possible a derivation for every valid argument.. there is no assignment of truth values that makes the premises true and the conclusion false. there is a derivation of the conclusion from the premises in the deductive system.23 For instance. 137 23 . A deductive system that was not complete could be very frustrating. It allows us to infer R from N ÷ R and N. consider ÷E. A deductive system that was not sound would not be very useful. In other words. Fortunately.Derivations II a set of premises. Fortunately D1 is complete. we would like to be sure that our derivation system will not lead us from truths to falsehoods. The proof of this is beyond the scope of this book. one could derive conclusions that don’t follow from the premises.e. obviously R must be made true by that assignment as well. there is no assignment of truth values that makes the premises all true and the conclusion false. Even if we knew that an argument was valid. A deductive system for the language L1 is sound if and only if whenever a sentence of L1 can be derived from premises using the derivation system. A deductive system for L1 is complete if and only if for every argument that is valid (i. but you can perhaps become convinced that none of the rules can ever lead from truths to falsehoods. Using an unsound system. it might be impossible to find a derivation showing the argument valid in that incomplete system. only the rules given in Chapter 4 are needed to make a complete A rigorous proof that D1 is sound requires the use of mathematical induction. If both N and N ÷ R are made true by an assignment of truth values. D1 is sound. In fact. The second thing we want to be true of D1 is that it be complete. that is.

but they don’t make possible any derivations that couldn’t be done using only the rules of Chapter 4. So long as the rules are sound and complete. 138 .Introductory Logic system. Nearly every different logic book has a different set of rules. one deductive system is as good as another. There are many different deductive systems for L1 that are both sound and complete. tradition. 24 The proof that D1 is complete is beyond the scope of this book.24 The additional rules of Chapter 5 help to make derivations easier. and pedagogy. The choice of rules to include is based on convenience. from the point of view of logic.

) CD assumption rule: Immediately after a line of the form SHOW N÷R . (Annotation: AID. a line N may appear. N & R may appear on a line. (Annotation: the line numbers of the earlier lines on which the conjuncts appear plus &I. (Annotation: the line number of the earlier line plus &E.) ID Assumption rule: Immediately after a line of the form.) w-Exploitation rule: If N w R and ~N appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation R may appear on a line. (Annotation: the numbers of the earlier lines plus øE.Derivations II Rules for D1 Assumption Rules: Any sentence may appear on a line as a premise. if N w R and~R appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation N may appear on a line. then R may appear on a line. (Annotation: the numbers of the earlier lines plus ÷E.) 139 . (Annotation: line numbers of the two earlier lines and wE. a line ~N may appear. (Annotation: the number of the earlier line plus I. (Annotation: P. then N ø R may appear on a line. SHOW N.) Basic Rules of Inference Premise Rule: &-Exploitation Rule: If N & R appears on an earlier accessible line of a derivation. if N ø R and R appear on earlier accessible lines then N may appear on a line.) ø-Introduction rule: If N ÷ R and R ÷ N appear on earlier accessible lines.) ø-Exploitation rule: If N ø R and N appear on an earlier accessible line then R may appear on a line. (Annotation: the numbers of the earlier line plus øI.) ÷-Exploitation rule: If N ÷ R and N appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. provided there are no lines other than premises earlier in the proof. either N or R may appear alone on a line.) &-Introduction Rule: If N and R appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. (Annotation: ACD.) w-Introduction rule: If N appears on a line then either N w R or R w N may appear on a line.

The sentence on that line is the conclusion of the derivation. then the “SHOW” line may be canceled and subsequent lines boxed. Direct Derivation Rule: When a sentence on an accessible line is identical to the sentence on the most recent uncanceled “SHOW” line. 140 . Derived Rules of Inference for D1 Modus Tollens Rule: If N ÷ R and ~R appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. (Annotation: the numbers of the earlier lines plus !I) Structural Rules !-Introduction rule: If N and ~N both appear on earlier accessi- Accessible lines: A line is accessible only if (1) it does not have uncanceled “SHOW”. and (2) it is not boxed. (Annotation: ID appears on the canceled “SHOW” line. SHOW rule: Any sentence may appear on a line preceded by “SHOW.) Indirect Derivation Rule: If “!” appears on an accessible line.Introductory Logic Pseudo-inference rule: ble lines. then ~N may appear on a line. then ! may appear on a line. (Annotation: DD appears on the canceled “SHOW” line. and the most recent “SHOW” line is not “SHOW !”.) Conditional Derivation Rule: If R appears on an accessible line and the most recent uncanceled “SHOW” line is of the form N ÷ R.” One “SHOW” line must appear before any lines other than premise lines.) Completed Derivation A derivation is completed when and only when the first “SHOW” line is canceled. (Annotation: CD appears on the canceled SHOW line. the “SHOW” may be canceled and all the subsequent lines boxed. the “SHOW” may be canceled and subsequent lines boxed. the derivation is said to be a derivation of its conclusion from its premises (if any).

N may appear on a line. provided R and 2 are instances of one of the pairs of forms in the list below. (Annotation: AID. R may appear on a line. (Annotation: the line numbers of the earlier line plus SC. N ÷ 2. a line N may appear. may appear on a line.Derivations II (Annotation: The line numbers of the earlier lines plus MT. 2.) Replacement Rules for D1 If N appears on an earlier accessible line.) Repetition: If N appears on an earlier accessible line. N ÷ 2 may appear on a line. and R ÷ 2 appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. Annotation: The appropriate abbreviation below. (Annotation: The line number of the earlier lines plus HS.) Separation of Cases: If N w R.) ID Assumption Rule Second Form: Immediately after a line of the form.) Hypothetical Syllogism: If N ÷ R and R ÷ 2 appear on earlier accessible lines of a derivation. (Annotation: The line number of the earlier line plus R. R of N with a sentence.) Separation of Cases 2: If N ÷ R and ~N ÷ R appear on earlier lines of a derivation. the result of replacing one sentential part. DN ~~N :: N DeM ~(N & R) :: ~N w ~R ~(N w R) :: ~N & ~R ~(N ø R) :: ~N ø R ~÷ ~(N ÷ R) :: N & ~R ~ø Com Assoc N & (R & 2) :: (N & R) & 2 N w (R w 2) :: (N w R) w 2 N ø (R ø 2) :: (N ø R) ø 2 Dist N & R :: R & N N w R :: R w N N ø R :: R ø N N ÷ R :: ~N w R ~N ÷ R :: N w R N & (R w 2) :: (N & R) w (N & 2) N w (R & 2) :: (N w R) & (N w 2) N ÷ R :: ~R ÷ ~N ÷w Ctr 141 . 2 may appear on a line. SHOW ~N. (Annotation: the line numbers of the earlier lines plus SC2.

as you can see by considering an assignment of truth values that makes the premises true and the conclusion false. consider the following argument: All humans are mortal. L2 is an extension of L1. these can be combined to make sentences of L2. so we will learn about quantifiers and how they work. Many valid arguments cannot be shown valid with any of the techniques we have developed for L1 For instance. 142 . we must consider the structure of the statements. which enable us to create open sentences and complex predicates. Socrates is mortal. and we will learn what these more complex interpretations are like. The new features of the language require its interpretations to be more complex than interpretations of L1. The best we can do symbolizing this argument in L1 is this (using the obvious interpretation): P Q ˆR But this argument is not valid.Introductory Logic Chapter 6: Monadic Quantification In this chapter we will begin to learn a more complex language. we must look at some of the internal structure of sentences. We will begin by learning about names and simple predicates. 1: Names and Predicates In order handle more kinds of arguments. Finally we will work on translating between L2 and English. Socrates is human. To do this we will introduce a new language. The real power of L2 comes from combining open sentences with quantifiers. Then we will learn about variables. In this language we can express some of the internal structure of sentences. L2. L2. Therefore. In order to understand the validity of the English argument.

and many things are done in different orders or in different ways. c24. it has all the features of L1 and more besides. it has a different structure from English. is not a simple language. L2 is quite a simple language. in Rochester. for example. and Goodman St.Monadic Quantification that is. New York The Crab Nebula The desk in Mr. b But none of the following are names in L2: P. In this section we will begin to learn about names and predicates. you already know English. Fortunately. v. But this is not because L2 is hard. 521 Lattimore The first “p” on this page. We break them into four basic elements: names. predicates. In L2 we take a very simplified view of the structure of sentences. For names in L2 we will use lower case Roman letters in the range “a” through “u. Thus all of the following are names of L2: a. English. e: Queen Elizabeth II of England n: Nelson Mandela 143 . variables. k. Although L2 is not a complex language. however. d. on the contrary. a name might designate any one of the following: Susan B. A name in L2 is a term that designates a particular thing. Bennett’s office. Sentences that appear very similar in English may be quite different in L2. * We can give meaning to a name in L2 by indicating which particular object it designates. x97. r.” with and without Arabic numerical subscripts. u239. Anthony Harriet Tubman Bill Clinton The number 10 B The intersection of Elmwood Ave. You should note that L2 is not very much like English. For example. and quantifiers. biv.

we will be confining ourselves mostly to what we shall call one-place or monadic predicates: those that are made by removing only one name from a sentence. And yet a third predicate by removing both names (in this case we use the symbol “Ï” to indicate where the second name was removed): Î kissed Ï. and “n” designate Nelson Mandela. In logic. For instance. But you will need to be aware that there are other predicates in order to understand some features of our treatment. Predicates are what is left of sentences when names are removed.) Predicates in L2 are upper case Roman letters with or without Arabic numeral subscripts. a predicate is (approximately) something you get by taking a sentence and removing one or more names from it. consider this English sentence: Alonzo kissed Susan. Q27 but none of the following are: 144 . When we speak of predicates in Logic class. (In this chapter. G. Z. We can get a different predicate by taking out the name “Alonzo” instead: Î kissed Susan.Introductory Logic This makes “e” designate Queen Elizabeth. Thus all of the following are predicates in L2: A. we are not using the term in its ordinary sense. We can get a logical predicate out of this by removing the name “Susan” (we use the symbol “Î” to mark the place where we took the name out): Alonzo kissed Î.

we will for consistency use the symbols here too. 145 25 . We can make sentences in L2 by combining names with predicates. the second that Nelson Mandela is. So the following are also sentences of L2: He w Sn Se ÷ Hn (He & Sn) ø ~(Hn w Se) You should have no difficulty figuring out what these sentences say.Monadic Quantification Big. SÎ: Î is a South African This gives “H” in L2 nearly the same meaning as “is a head of state” in English. the third that Queen Elizabeth is a South African. In particular. For instance the following are sentences of L2: He Hn Se Sn Given the meanings we assigned above. the first says that Queen Elizabeth is a head of state. but since we will need such symbols in the next chapter when we treat predicates of more than one place. In L2 we also have available all the resources of L1. we have all the truth-functional sentence connectives of L1 available. Mvii. 1 We can say what a predicate of L2 means by matching it with an English sentence from which names have been removed:25 HÎ: Î is a head of state. In L2 we can make a sentence from a one-place predicate and a name by placing the name after the predicate. and the fourth that Nelson Mandela is a South African. Especially note that you cannot do things like this in L2: Note that we wouldn’t really need to use the “Î” symbol here. Note that all the formation rules of L1 still apply in L2.

Pc & Fa Km & Kn ÷ Kr Bz ø ~Bc P(c & a) ÷ Da (Pa & Qa) ÷ ~Ra Gc ø Hu Za & (Cb ø Tr) Cc ÷ (Vd ø Cy) Given the meanings below. 10. 14. 4.) Exercises 6-1 Indicate which of the following are sentences of L2. 13. SÎ: Î is on the softball team. a: Alice b: Benjamin c: Carol d: Donald 9. explain why not. LÎ: Î is on the lacrosse team. Ld & Bb Ha & ~Hc ~Hc ÷ Sc La ø Lb La ÷ (Sd & Hb) ~(Lb & La) ø ~(Ba w Bd) 146 . indicate what the following sentences of L2 say: BÎ: Î is on the baseball team. 8. 7.Introductory Logic H(e w n) WRONG!! (H w S)e WRONG!! (In the next section of this chapter we will see how to make complex predicates out of simple ones that will do something like what the expression “H w S” might be intended to do above. 11. 3. HÎ: Î is on the field hockey team. 1. 5. 6. for those that are not. 12. 2.

Consider a simple open sentence. Variables in L2 are lower case Roman letters in the range “v” through “z. xmine Variables can be used in L2 anywhere that names can be used (and. z. We call the result of replacing a name by a variable in a sentence of L2 an open sentence. the following are all variables of L2: v. x. Px and suppose the meaning of the predicate “P” is given thus: PÎ: Î is President of the United States in 2005. y. An open sentence is not a sentence (any more than a decoy duck is a duck). and by no one else.) Open sentences are not true or false. x23. it is satisfied by George Walker Bush. we will only be concerned with open sentences that have only one variable in them (that may occur more than once. though. Variables don’t designate anything in particular. The following are all open sentences of L2: Fx ÷ Gx Gr ÷ Cy Mz ø ~ Mw Mr w (Lx & Ty) For the rest of this chapter. This expression could be misleading. When we combine a variable and a predicate. as we shall see in Section 4. in some places that names can’t be used). or satisfied by. w. they are merely place holders. w234 but the following are not: c. we don’t get a sentence. For instance. Thus.” with or without Arabic numeral subscripts. v. h. and Satisfaction L2 also has variables. but it can be true of. rather they are satisfied by things. Open Sentences. as in the first sentence above.Monadic Quantification 2: Variables. If the predicate “F” is given this 147 . things. The open sentence “Px” does not say anything.

The extension of a monadic predicate is the extension of the open sentence we get by putting a variable after the predicate. Hilary Clinton will satisfy this sentence.) “Pp ÷ ~Fp” is surely true. So. George Walker Bush will also satisfy it. It is also true of Elizabeth Dole (assume “d” is a name designating her). the pope. if “g” is a name for George Walker Bush. it is also satisfied by every other person on earth. it is. Obviously. Suppose we consider a sentence like “Fx w Px. Then the open sentence “Fx” is satisfied by all females. In general we can give the following simple account of an object’s satisfying an open sentence: An object satisfies an open sentence with only one variable if and only if when a name for the object replaces the variable at all of its occurrences in the open sentence. for “Fh w Ph” is true. since “Pd ÷ ~Fd” will be true because its antecedent is false.Introductory Logic meaning: FÎ: Î is female. because “Pg ÷ ~Fg” is true. if we want to know whether the open sentence “Fx” is satisfied by Hilary Rodham Clinton.” This holds for open sentences of any complexity. Bush. since its consequent is true. for instance.” This sentence is satisfied by George W.” where “Px” has the meaning assigned to it above. we just replace the “x” in “Fx” by some name for Hilary Rodham Clinton. Now consider the sentence “Px ÷ ~Fx. say. It should be easy to see that everyone on earth will satisfy “Px ÷ ~Fx.” The set of objects that satisfy a given open sentence (on some interpretation) is called the extension of that open sentence (on that interpretation). it doesn’t matter which variable we use in 148 . and by nothing else. In fact. you can easily verify that George Walker Bush does not satisfy “Fx. So the extension of “Fx w Px” is the set consisting of all female persons plus George Walker Bush. the resulting sentence is true. Consider. because. But in fact.” Similarly. so Hilary Rodham Clinton satisfies “Fx.” to get a sentence “Fh” and ask whether the resulting sentence is true.” In open sentences. say “h. all females as well as George Walker Bush satisfy “Fx w Px. (Assume that “p” is a name designating him. “Fg w Pg” is true.

26 DÎ: Î is a dog. 6. “Fy w Py” is satisfied by exactly the same things as “Fx w Px” and “Fz w Pz” Exercises 6-2 On the basis of the given account of the meaning of the predicates. say which animals satisfy the open sentences following: CÎ: Î is a canid. and an interpretation must give meaning to those as well. b: Fido (a dog) s: Tabby (a cat) 1. because in L1 the only language elements to interpret were sentence letters. In L1 an interpretation only needed to assign statements to each sentence letter. WÎ: Î is a wolf. 12.Monadic Quantification sentences in which only one variable occurs. In L2 there are both names and predicates. 2. about which we are talking. 149 26 . foxes. 4. 11. 7. 3. wolves. MÎ: Î is a mammal. In addition. coyotes. an interpretation must identify a set of objects. which we shall call the domain. 5. The domain will identify A canid is an animal that is a member of the family Canidae that includes dogs. but not cats. 10. 8. 9. and jackals. Dx Dy w Wy Dz & Wz Rw w Mw Dv ÷ Mv Mx ÷ Dx Dy ø My Cz ø ~Mz (Rw & Cw) ÷ Mw (Dv w Wv) ÷ (Mv & Cv) Db w Wx Mx ø Ws 3: Interpretations and Small Domains We must now explain interpretations for L2. RÎ: Î is a reptile.

complete interpretations would be extremely inconvenient to use. b:Fido (a dog) s: Tabby (a cat) Not every interpretation uses a large domain like the set of all animals. the moon. WÎ: Î is a wolf. We will write the domain this way: D: animals Any set of objects may be the domain for an interpretation. we could take as our domain {The Pope. Sometimes it is useful. to create small domains as we want them. An interpretation will have to provide meanings for the predicates and names that occur in sentences we are interested in. So we shall get along with partial interpretations: interpretations that give meanings only to those language elements that we are using on any particular occasion. Madonna}. But it can be useful to have a small domain for which we can 150 . Bush. and the number three. An interpretation for L2 will begin by specifying the domain. As in L1. 3} This specifies a domain containing exactly three objects: George W. RÎ: Î is a reptile. the moon. MÎ: Î is a mammal.Introductory Logic objects to which the open sentences of the language will apply. DÎ: Î is a dog. Thus we might have taken the set of all animals as the domain for exercises 6-2. as with L1. a complete interpretation would provide meanings for all the expressions possible in the language. especially when dealing with complicated sentences. Here is all of the interpretation presented in exercises 6-2: D: animals CÎ: Î is a canid. We shall use an upper case “D” to designate it. If we want to have a small domain with only a few objects in it. The objects in a domain need not have anything in common. Bush. For instance. But. we may specify it by presenting a set in the usual mathematical notation: D: {George W.

” These tell us that the whole sentence has the value True. We can ask which figures in the diagram open sentences are true of.” Will the figure on the left satisfy this open sentence? Yes. the following is an interpretation for the second diagram: D: The stick figures to the left FÎ: Î has an “F” above it GÎ: Î has a “G” above it.” We can determine that this is true by first noting that “Fa” and “Ga” are true on this interpretation: they say respectively that the figure on the left has an “F” above it and that the figure on the left has a “G” above it.” we might have the diagram below. To say which predicates are true or false of the objects in this domain. Then we calculate the truth-value of the whole sentence using the rules for the connective “ø. If we were concerned also with the predicate “H. but the predicate “G” is true only of the left one.Monadic Quantification create artificial predicates that apply to whatever we want in the domain. We can refer to this domain thus: D: The stick figures to the left. You can work this out in detail (if necessary) by assigning a name. consider the open sentence “Fx ø Gx. “Fa ø Ga.” to the figure on the left and checking the truth value of the sentence you get by replacing the “x” in “Fx ø Gx” by that name. say “a. Making the replacement gives the sentence.” it would be true of neither figure in this diagram. The diagrams are not themselves interpretations. we can put letters above the objects which satisfy the predicate letters. For instance. but there is a simple way to generate interpretations from them. the 151 A small domain . At the left is a domain of two objects. Both are true. One way to custom design small domains is to make diagrams of an imaginary domain. HÎ: Î has an “H” above it. For instance. For instance. This diagram shows that the predicate “F” is true of both figures. if we are concerned with only the predicates “F” and “G. because both “F” and “G” are true of it. Since it does.

) We can easily discover which objects in the domain satisfy various open sentences on this interpretation. 3}. For instance. we simply specify the objects in the domain that satisfy the predicate by presenting the set of all objects that do. we might have an interpretation like this: D: {1. it is easy to verify that “Fa ø Ga” is true on this interpretation. and a domain of three objects would be {1.) We could pick any numbers to be in our small domains.] (The reader should have no difficulty recognizing that this is very similar to the interpretation above using the stick figure diagram. a domain of two objects would be {1. (This method is particularly suited for people who are more comfortable with numbers than with pictures of people. 2} GÎ: Î is in {1} HÎ: Î is in {} [Note that {} is the empty set. custom-made domains. We can use numbers as the objects in the domain. So a domain of one object would be {1}. “Fx ø Gx. but for convenience. 2}. so 1 satisfies the open sentence “Fx ø Gx.” Does 2 satisfy it? Which numbers in the domain satisfy “Gx ø Hx?” 152 . we will pick the first few positive integers. To assign meanings to the predicates. 2} FÎ: Î is in {1.Introductory Logic figure on the left satisfies the open sentence “Fx ø Gx. 2. consider the sentence.” If “a” names 1. For instance.” Does the figure on the right? Which figures satisfy “Gx ø Hx?” There is a second way to produce small.

” and “c. D: {1. tell which stick figures satisfy the given open sentences. (For the purpose of giving your answers. SÎ: Î has a “S” above it. tell which numbers satisfy the given open sentences. 2. 13. 6. 2} NÎ: Î is in {1} PÎ: Î is in {} 9. 15. 5. 14. TÎ: Î has a “T” above it. 10. Mv w Nv Mw & Pw Px ÷ Nx (Px v Nx) ÷ Mx ~Pz ÷ (Mz & Nz) (~Pv & Nv) ÷ Mv Mw ø (~Pw v Nw) ~(Px ÷ Mx) 153 . 3. 16. “a. 7.” “b. RÎ: Î has an “R” above it. Rx & Sx Ry w Sy Rz ÷ Sz Sv ÷ Rv Rw ø Tw ~Rx ÷ ~Tx (Ry & Ty) ÷ Sy (Rz v Sz) ø ~Tz Using the interpretation given. 2. 8. 3} MÎ: Î is in {1.Monadic Quantification Exercises 6-3 Using the diagram and interpretation given. name the figures. 12. 11. from left to right. 4.”) D: the stick figures to the left. 1.

“›.” that occurs at two places and is not bound by any quantifier. Let’s illustrate this. “x. provided that variable is not already bound by another quantifier occurrence. 154 27 .” we get We shall defer a formal statement of the syntax of L2 to the appendix at the end of this chapter.” Here are some sample quantifiers: œx œw œx17 ›y ›z ›v13 A quantifier beginning with a universal quantifier symbol is called a universal quantifier.Introductory Logic 4: Quantifiers The sentences we have so far seen in L2 do not enable us to say much beyond what could be said in L1. A quantifier goes at the beginning of a formula of L2. Some are only formulas of L2. But we can go beyond L1 using quantifiers. and a quantifier beginning with an existential quantifier symbol is called an existential quantifier. but not every formula is a sentence. A quantifier is said to bind occurrences of its variable in the open sentence to which it is attached. the universal quantifier symbol. and they can be put anywhere a “~” could be put. If we put in front of “Fx ÷ Gx” a universal quantifier containing “x. it has a variable. However. Syntactically. “œ” and the existential quantifier symbol. you may find it helpful to refer to that more rigorous discussion in connection with the points about syntax in this and the next few paragraphs.27 Thus the following are all acceptable: œx(Fx ø Gx) ›x(Fx & ~Gx) Fy ø ~›x(Rx w ~Tx) Although these are all syntactically correct. There are two quantifier symbols. they are not all sentences of L2. “Fx ÷ Gx” is a formula that is an open sentence. Usually this formula is an open sentence. To explain the difference we must explain free and bound variables. Thus the first three quantifiers above are universal quantifiers and the second three are existential quantifiers. Every sentence of L2 is a formula. quantifiers are one-place logical operators. Quantifiers in L2 are complex symbols. each quantifier is made up of a quantifier symbol followed by a variable.

if we put a universal quantifier “œx” in front of an open sentence “Rx & Tx” to get the sentence “œx(Rx & Tx). The meanings of the quantifiers are quite simple. For instance.” We will try to avoid this sort of situation. When we put a universal quantifier in front of an open sentence whose only free variable is the universal quantifier’s variable. Our syntax rules define what it is to be a formula.) Now both occurrences of “x” within the parentheses are bound by the quantifier. Consider also this more complex formula: Fx ø (›xGx ÷ Tx) If we put a universal quantifier containing “x” in front of this. œx(Fxø (›yGy ÷ Tx)) A quantifier can only bind variables identical to the one it contains.” because that “x” is already bound by the existential quantifier.” (Notice how. Any formula containing free variables is not a sentence. we get œx(Fx ø (›xGx ÷ Tx)) In this case.” this last sentence says that everything in the domain of our interpretation satisfies the open sentence “Rx & Tx.” immediately in front of the “G. just as with “~. preferable is the equivalent sentence. “›x. A variable that is not bound by any quantifier in a formula is said to be free. then explain what free variables are. Sentences of L2 are formulas that contain no free variables. then declare that sentences are formulas without free variables. but so are strings of symbols which would be a sentence but for having free variables. even though the meanings of the sentences that can be made with them are very complex. the initial universal quantifier binds the “x” immediately after the “F” and the “x” immediately after the “T. the “y” is not bound.” It does not bind the “x” immediately after the “G. Sentences are formulas. and is not true or false. In “œx(Fx ÷ Gy)” only the “x” is bound.” we had to restore the parentheses before adding the quantifier. the resulting sentence says that everything in the domain satisfies the open sentence the quantifier is attached to.Monadic Quantification “œx(Fx ÷ Gx).” or in other words. 155 .

SÎ: Î is a senior. We can come to understand quantified sentences better by looking at an interpretation and some quantified sentences of L2. at least one university student is both a senior and studies logic. and so the consequent is true of him or her. Using this interpretation. “›x(Sx w Jx)” says that there is a university student who is either a junior or a senior. using the interpretation above. consider any arbitrary student. “Jz ÷ ~Sz” is false of him or her. then he or she is not a senior. if the student is a junior. and consequently the whole is. Other sentences involving the existential quantifier get similar accounts under the above interpretation. then the antecedent of the open sentence. On the other hand. the resulting sentence says that at least one thing in the domain satisfies the open sentence the quantifier is attached to. “œz(Jz ÷ ~Sz)” would say that every university student is such that if he or she is a junior. and hence the whole is true of him or her. “›y(Ly ø Sy)” says that there is a university student who is a senior if and only if he 156 .” that is. WÎ: Î works hard. That is true. LÎ: Î studies logic. If you are not sure that this last sentence is true. and so the sentence. “œz(Jz ÷ ~Sz)” is just true. Either he or she is a junior. “›x(Sx & Jx)” says that at least one university student is both a senior and a junior. the open sentence is true of the student. and that is false. the sentence “œxSx” would say that every university student is a senior. that is true. then he or she is certainly not also a senior.Introductory Logic everything is both R and T. Consider this interpretation: D: University Students JÎ: Î is a junior. that is also false. “œy(Ly & Wy)” would say that every university student studies logic and works hard. When we put an existential quantifier in front of an open sentence whose only free variable is the existential quantifier’s variable. The existential quantifier is equally simple. This is true. In either case. that is false. For instance. putting “›x” in front of “Sx & Lx” to get “›x(Sx & Lx)” says that there is at least one university student who satisfies the open sentence “Sx & Lx. or not. If not.

this is also true. 5.Monadic Quantification or she studies logic. 13. œv(Av ÷ Bv) œw(Bw ÷ Aw) ›x(Cx w Bx) ›y(Ay & By) ~œz(Az & ~Bz) ~›v(Av & ~Cv) ~›w~Bw ~œx~Cx 157 . PÎ: Î is currently president of the United States 1. 9. BÎ: Î has a “B” above it. left AÎ: Î has an “A” above it. 6. 7. CÎ: Î has a “C” above it. Exercises 6-4 Using the appropriate interpretation. 15. 14. 8. 4. 3. 16. 2. D: People FÎ: Î is female. 10. GÎ: Î plays golf. 12. MÎ: Î is male. tell whether each of the following sentences is true or false. œx(Mx w Fx) ›y(Py & My) ›z(Gz w ~Pz) œw(Fw ø Gw) ›v(Fv & Pv) ~›x(Fx & ~Px) œy(Py ÷ ~Fy) ~œz(Gz ÷ Mz) D: The stick figures in the diagram. 11.

” Let’s try to understand why this translation works.3} SÎ: Î is in {2. The first step in translation is to understand the translation of sentences like “All A’s are B’s. 3} RÎ: Î is in {1. 18. 2. 23. 3} 17. MÎ: Î is mortal. 20. D: People HÎ: Î is a human.” The only way a person can fail to satisfy this open sentence is by satisfying the antecedent. 22. you already understand English. 21. or in other words. all humans are mortal. Fortunately. This same reasoning can work for all sentences that say that 158 . 2. Most of the difficulty is with English: L2 is a much simpler language than English. but you will need to pay careful attention to how it is used in making translations. “œx(Hx ÷ Mx)” will be true just in case every person satisfies “Hx ÷ Mx. and this can confuse beginners. by being human but not mortal. we can translate “All humans are mortal” as “œx(Hx ÷ Mx). 19. 24.” Given the following interpretation. but not the consequent. that is. but it has a different structure. So the sentence says that there aren’t any humans who aren’t mortal.Introductory Logic D: {1. œy(Ry ÷ Ty) œz(Tz w ~Rz) œvTv ÷ ›vRv œwRw ø œwSw ›x(Rx & Sx) ø ~œxSx ~›x~Tx ÷ œy(Ry ÷ Sy) ›z(Tz ø œvRv) ›w(Sw ÷~›xTx) 5: Translation: “All” and its Variants Translation between English and L2 can be tricky. 3} TÎ: Î is in {1.

Hence the antecedent is “Sy & Ly) and the whole is œy([Sy & Ly] ÷ Wy) In the expression using Greek letters. so the first step is to make a similar pseudo-sentence: œy(y is a student who studies logic ÷ y works hard) (I have used “y” as the variable this time. “All who study logic work hard.” can be translated similarly .Monadic Quantification all such-and-suches are so-and-sos. it is “Wy. the Greek nu (“<”) stands for any variable.) The consequent is easy. œ<(N< ÷ R<). We will do best to work step by step. arriving at this translation into L2: œx(Lx ÷ Wx) The sentence “All students who study logic work hard. 159 28 .” so it should be translated by a universally quantified conditional. even with these simple sentences. but is slightly more complicated.” The antecedent is slightly more complicated: a student who studies logic is someone who is both a student and a studier of logic. It is of the same form.” This is of the form “All such-and-suches are so-and-sos.28 Let’s consider some examples to see how this translation works. All such sentences will be translated by a sentence of the general form. Suppose we have the following interpretation: D: People JÎ: Î is a junior LÎ: Î studies logic SÎ: Î is a student WÎ: Î works hard Consider the sentence. it doesn’t matter which variable one uses here. and “N<” and “R<” stand for open sentences with < as their only free variable. We can start by making a pseudo-sentence combining English and L2: œx(x is one who studies logic ÷ x works hard) Now we can easily see how to translate the antecedent and consequent.

allowing that it may be that some juniors study logic and some don’t. These sentences make two quite different statements! The two can be translated easily into L2: ~œx(Jx ÷ Lx) and œx(Jx ÷ ~Lx) The first denies that something is true of every junior. he or she works hard.” Hence it will have the translation. In this book. Each student who studies logic works hard. ~œz(Jz ÷ Lz) Don’t confuse “Not every junior studies logic” with “Every junior does not study logic.Introductory Logic (Note that to improve readability I have used square brackets instead of parentheses for bracketing the antecedent. The second asserts something of every junior: it claims that each and every one does not study logic. The sentence. Students who study logic work hard. If a student studies logic. we shall try to avoid ambiguous English sentences. Because properly formed sentences of L2 are never ambiguous.” The latter sentence is ambiguous: it might mean “Not every junior studies logic. L2 provides a good way to represent clearly different ways of reading ambiguous English sentences. There are other English idioms that say the same thing as “all” without using that word. except when we are deliberately illustrating ambiguity. Every student who studies logic works hard. “Not every junior studies logic” can also be translated easily.” but its favored reading is “Every junior fails to study logic” which means something different. You can see that the following are all equivalent: All students who study logic work hard.) Proceeding step by step and inserting the brackets as you go helps you to get the brackets in the right places. we can use the square brackets here just as we did in L1. A student who studies logic works hard. 160 . to translate it you just need to note that it is just the logical denial of “Every junior studies logic.

“If everyone works hard. Since “Wa ÷ Wh” is false. A true sentence can’t mean the same as a false one. Consider the following interpretation: D: People WÎ: Î works hard a: Alonzo h: Homer and the sentence. it should not be translated by an L2 sentence of one of those forms. and the second sentence is false. But the second statement is a universally quantified statement. mechanical rules will sometimes lead you astray.” This sentence may be correctly translated by this sentence of L2: œxWx ÷ Wh However. so the two sentences of L2 don’t mean the same. it could not be correctly translated by this sentence: œx(Wx ÷ Wh) WRONG TRANSLATION!! To see that these sentences do not mean the same. and so is true. then whatever words may be used. because English is such a complicated language. In translating between English and L2. Since in that case not everyone works hard. though: in other contexts words like “each” and “every” may not be equivalent. If it is. Homer does. Sometimes it is useful to note that when you have to use the same variable in two parts of a sentence. the quantifier will have 161 . not a universal quantifier. in the case of the denial). Be careful. consider their truth values if Homer does not work hard but Alonzo does. then you will translate it by an L2 sentence of the form œ<(N< ÷ N<) (or ~œ<(N< ÷ N<). any simple. If the sentence is not saying or denying that all such-andsuches are so-and-sos.Monadic Quantification The sentences would all be translated by the same sentence of L2. and often “a” is used in a sentence that would be translated using an existential. You should always try to understand what English sentences say. The placement of quantifiers and parentheses can be crucial. and then see how to say that in L2. Ask yourself whether the English sentence you are translating is really saying (or denying) that all such-and-suches are so-and-sos. since it is a conditional. the first sentence has a false antecedent. “Wx ÷ Wh” is not satisfied by Alonzo.

D: People PÎ: Î is purple. we may be uncertain whether the English behaves as the L2 sentence does.” Then no matter what item “a” may be. Consider. the antecedent of “Ta ÷ Pa” will be false. This “x” is free.) If nothing satisfies the antecedent of a universally quantified conditional. “Everyone over 15 feet tall fails to be purple” does not deny that everyone over fifteen feet tall is purple. if we have this interpretation. if the quantifier does not bind any variable in part of the sentence. it is true. So everything will satisfy “Tx ÷ Px” and thus “œx(Tx ÷ Px)” will be true. like the last occurrence of “x” in œxFx ÷ Gx NOT A SENTENCE. For instance. but it is not. both “Everyone over 15 feet tall is purple” and “Everyone over 15 feet tall fails to be purple” will come out true.” On the other hand.Introductory Logic to come at the beginning of the sentence so it can bind both occurrences. Some consequences of this may be surprising.” Since we wouldn’t ordinarily say something like that unless we believed there were people over 15 feet tall. as in œxWx ÷ Wa the (The scope of the quantifier is limited to antecedent. for instance. It may seem as though this is a contradiction. For instance. This probably should be “œx(Fx ÷ Gx). and therefore “Ta ÷ Pa” will be true. “œx(Tx ÷ Px). otherwise there will be a free variable. on this account.” and suppose that nothing satisfies “Tx. then “œx(Tx ÷ Px) will translate “Everyone over 15 feet tall is purple. 162 . that part often does not need to be in the quantifier’s scope. There is no variable in the consequent. TÎ: Î is over 15 feet tall. we shall declare that in this book all English sentences of the form “All such-and-suches are so-and-so” are true if there are no such-and-suches. However. This follows from what we have said.

WÎ: Î is a woodwind instrument 1. Every double-reed instrument is a woodwind. 3. 4. 8. Both English horns and krummhorns are double-reed instruments. Neither English horns nor krummhorns are brass instruments. “Not everyone over fifteen feet tall is purple. 7. VÎ: Î is a violin. Everyone over fifteen feet tall fails to be purple. All violins are string instruments. KÎ:Î is a krummhorn. If every violin is a string instrument. There are people who are over fifteen feet tall. D: The stick figures to the left. SÎ: Î is a string instrument. Krummhorns are double-reed instruments unless English horns are brass instruments. 5. Exercises 6-5 Translate the following into L2 using the interpretations given. LÎ: Î has an “L” above it. However. Each English horn is a woodwind. 163 . as are their translations into L2: Everyone over fifteen feet tall is purple. then not every violin is a brass instrument. A krummhorn is a double-reed instrument and not a brass instrument. D: musical instruments BÎ: Î is a brass instrument DÎ: Î is a double-reed instrument EÎ: Î is an English horn. 6. the following three statements are inconsistent.Monadic Quantification to deny that we would have to say. but not every violin is. 2.

11. PÎ: Î has a “P” above it. 13. then every number in {1} is in {1. 3} is either in {1} or in {2. 10. 22. 3}. 3}. Not every figure with an “L” above it has an “M” above it. D: {1. 3} and 2 is also. 3} 2 is in {2. then that number is not in {1}. 3} or {2. 14. A number is in either {1} or {2. If 2 is in {2. 12. Every number in {1. 24. 6: Translation: “At least one” and its variants “At least one such-and-such is so-and-so” may be translated by 164 . If a figure has a “P” above it. 19. A number that is in {1} is also in {1. Every figure has either an “L” or a “P” above it.Introductory Logic MÎ: Î has an “M” above it. 3} CÎ: Î is in {1} NÎ: Î is in {1. 23. 15. 3}. 2. 16. Not every figure with a “P” above it has an “L” above it. 3} TÎ: Î is in {2. then it doesn’t have an “L” above it. 3} t: 2 17. If a number is in {2. 21. All figures with an “M” above them have an “L” above them. 3} if and only if it is either in {1. 3}. A figure has both an “M” and an “L” above it if and only if it does not have a “P” above it. 9. Every figure with an “L” above it has either an “M” or a “P” above it. 20. Any figure that has neither an “M” nor an “L” above it has a “P” above it. 3} Not every number in {2. A number is in {1} if and only if it is both in {1} and in {1. 3}. 18. 3} is in {1. 3}.

” because we will understand “some” in the way logicians do so that it means “at least one. For instance. So it can translate sentences that say that in English. ›<(N< & R<).” may be translated “›x(Sx & Dx).” but their translations into L2 differ in more than just the quantifiers: ›x(Sx & Dx) ù ù œx(Sx ÷ Dx) These sentences differ not only in their quantifiers.Monadic Quantification an L2 sentence of the form.” Note that the structure of the translation of “Some students are diligent” is different from the structure of the translation of “All students are diligent. “›y(Sy& Dy)” can translate “Some students are diligent. using the following interpretation. and some people seem to think it must refer to a number greater than one.29 The existential quantifier is used to say that the open sentence following it is satisfied by at least one thing in the domain.” We shall also use the existential quantifier to translate sentences involving the English word “some. “Some:” Existentially quantified conjunction.” So using the above interpretation. 29 For an account of the Greek letters. “There is at least one student who is diligent. the sentence. SÎ: Î is a student. see footnote 4 above. Keep in mind this rule: “All:” Universally quantified conditional.” The English sentences look identical except for the words “some” and “all. but also in the connective used in the open sentence inside the quantifier. here we shall simply declare that in this book. 165 . you should look it up in a good dictionary. “some” always means “at least one.” “Some” refers to an indefinite number or quantity. If you want to know what “some” means in English. D:People DÎ: Î is diligent.

and give all my friends here a drink. If everyone drinks. hence the drinking principle is true. as we shall be able to show rigorously in later chapters. Hence the drinking principle is true. then the consequent of “Dx ÷ œyDy” is true. New Jersey. this is true. then there is at least one person who does not drink. The drinking principle may serve to remind us that we generally don’t want to put an existential quantifier in front of a The drinking principle and the associated joke are from Raymond Smullyan.30 The drinking principle derives from a joke. Later the drunk cried out again. Astonishingly.Introductory Logic It almost never makes sense to put an existential quantifier in front of a conditional. everybody drinks!” Drinks were sent round to general approval. If not everyone drinks. The drinking principle is this: There is some person such that if he or she drinks. in fact its translation into L2 is a logical truth. this person will satisfy “Dx ÷ œyDy” since its antecedent will be false of him or her. Either everyone drinks. everyone does. and when I pay. everybody pays!” So much for the joke. “Gimme a drink. and the open sentence will be satisfied by anyone.209 166 30 . consider the drinking principle. A while later the drunk called out. Hence the drinking principle is also true if not everyone drinks. everybody drinks!” More drinks were passed round to more general approval. because when I drink. It seems a drunk went into a bar and called out. “Gimme another drink. “Now I’m gonna pay. or not everyone drinks. 1978) p. What is the Name of this Book?. because when I drink. using the obvious interpretation: D: People DÎ: Î drinks (The Drinking Principle:) ›x(Dx ÷ œyDy) It is easy enough to see that this must be true. Englewood Cliffs. To reinforce this point. and give all my friends here another drink. (PrenticeHall. We can translate the drinking principle.

“œx(Lx ÷ Wx).” can be tricky in English. Some students who study logic work hard.Monadic Quantification conditional. unidentified student. all of the following are equivalent. and equally translated by “›x(Lx & Wx):” At least one student who studies logic works hard. A student who studies logic works hard. There is a student who studies logic and works hard.” The moral here is that you cannot tell merely from the fact that an indefinite article is used how the 167 . “›x(Lx & Fx). The indefinite article. and hence is translated using an existential quantifier. despite looking very much the same. You will discover a few exceptions to this rule of thumb. Compare the following English sentences. try to translate them using the interpretation above before reading the text following them.” But the second sentence. Such a sentence will be true on an interpretation if there is even one item in the domain that fails to satisfy the antecedent of the conditional. “Some:” Existentially quantified conjunction. D: students FÎ: Î fell down yesterday. Given this interpretation. We seldom want to say anything like that. LÎ: Î studies logic WÎ: Î works hard. The moral to remember is: “All:” Universally quantified conditional. There exists a student who studies logic and works hard. talks about some particular. A student who studies logic fell down yesterday. Hence it is translated using a universal quantifier. “a” or “an. The first sentence is a general statement: it talks about any student who studies logic. There are other idioms that are translated by the existential quantifier. but generally it will be good advice to follow.

D: Planets of the solar system 168 . it says that it is not the case that something satisfies “Sx.” You can see that this is plausible: to say that no student who studies logic works hard is obviously very much the same as saying that any student who studies logic fails to work hard. or about some indefinite number of persons. There does not exist a student who studies logic and works hard. Exercises 6-6 Translate the following into L2 using the interpretation given. There is no student who studies logic and works hard. If it is. Ask yourself whether the sentence is making a general claim about all people of some sort or other. To say in L2 that no student who studies logic works hard. So either sentence can be used to translate any of the English sentences above. Rather. we deny that there is a student who studies logic and works hard: “~›x(Lx & Wx).Introductory Logic sentence is to be translated. The denial of an existentially quantified statement says that there is nothing that satisfies the open sentence following it. that nothing does.” “~›xSx” denies that.” This sentence of L2 translates all of the following English statements: No student who studies logic works hard. not specifically identified. you must understand what it says and think how to translate that into L2.” that is. If it is making a statement about just one person. then it will be translated using a universal quantifier. In Chapter 9 we will learn how to show that these are equivalent. “›xSx” says that there is something that satisfies “Sx. then it will be translated with an existential quantifier. “~›x(Lx & Wx)” turns out to be equivalent to “œx(Lx ÷ ~Wx).

There’s a figure with a “B” above it. but no figure has both a “B” and a “C” above it. 3. Some planets are closer to the sun than the earth. 4. Some planets without rings are closer to the sun than the earth. There is at least one planet that has rings. 2. Some figure has a “A” above it if and only if no figure has both a “C” and a “B” above it. 7. JÎ: Î is a Jovian planet. but no planets farther from the sun than the earth that are not Jovian planets have rings. Some Jovian planets have rings. No figure fails to have a “A” above it.Monadic Quantification CÎ: Î is closer to the sun than the earth. (= Jupiter. 12. Uranus or Neptune) RÎ: Î has rings 1. 169 . 13. Some Jovian planets that are farther from the sun than the earth have rings. 14. 5. 6. but no planets closer to the sun than the earth do. then there is a figure that does not. Some figure with an “A” above it has a “C” above it. 16. D: the stick figures to the left AÎ: Î has an “A” above it. 9. There exists a figure with an “A” above it that has neither a “B” nor a “C” above it. 11. 15. Some planets that are farther from the sun than the earth are Jovian planets. Some figure has both an “A” and a “B” above it. BÎ: Î has a “B” above it. 8. At least one figure has both an “A” and a “C” above it. 10. If there is a figure that has a “B” above it. CÎ: Î has an “C” above it. No Jovian planet is closer to the sun than the earth. FÎ: Î is farther from the sun than the earth. Saturn. a figure with a “C” above it and a figure with an “A” above it. At least one Jovian planet has rings.

23. consider the sentence. Either 2 is not in {1} or some number is in both {1} and {3}. 24. 18. we seek to translate this sentence into L2. 2} b: 2 17.” so one translation would be: ~›x(~Bx & Dx) As we shall see in later chapters. D: People BÎ: Î is brave. For instance.2} only if there is no number in both {1} and {1. “Only the brave deserve the fair. 2} is in {1}. this is equivalent to œx(Dx ÷ Bx) This makes sense when you think about it: If no one who is not 170 . DÎ: Î deserves the fair. 2} then no number is in both {3} and {1}. To say that only the brave deserve the fair is to say the same as “None but the brave deserve the fair. 2. If 2 is in {1. There exists a number that is in both {3} and {1. 21. 20. 22. 2}.Introductory Logic D: {1. No number is in both {1} and {3} if and only if some number that is in {1.” Using the following interpretation. 3} OÎ: Î is in {1} PÎ: Î is in {3} QÎ: Î is in {1. Some number is in {1} No number is in both {1} and {3} If there exists a number in both {1} and {1. 2} then there exists a number in {3}. 19. 7: Some additional common idioms of English “Only” has a variety of uses in English. 2}. Either no number is in both {1} and {3} or some number is in neither {1} nor {1.

WÎ: Î works hard.Monadic Quantification brave deserves the fair. SÎ: Î is a student.” I seem to be saying that every student who passes will have worked hard. “The only students who will pass are those who work hard.” and use the following interpretation: D: Animals Î eats meat MÎ: TÎ: Î is a tiger WÎ: Î is a wolf. “Both wolves and tigers eat meat. But the original sentence did not speak of things that were wolves and also tigers. we can render this in L2 as œx[(Sx & Px) ÷ Wx] D: People PÎ: Î passes. If I say. and either is an acceptable translation. “Both” can be confusing in sentences that are translated with quantifiers. Either of these sentences will translate “Only the brave deserve the fair. it spoke of wolves and of tigers.” and hence to translate it as “~›x[(Sx & ~Wx) & Px]. Suppose we consider the sentence. Some people find it easier to think of “The only students who will pass are those who work hard” as saying the same as “No student who fails to work hard will pass. Thus using the given interpretation. then everyone who deserves the fair must be brave. One way to translate this sentence would be to take it to be a conjunction: œx(Wx ÷ Mx) & œy(Ty ÷ My) This makes the same claim that the original English sentence makes.” This is equivalent to the previous L2 sentence. But we can also translate it by a sentence with just one 171 .” Sentences involving “the only” seem to work differently. We might be tempted to translate the sentence thus: œx[(Wx & Tx) ÷ Mx] WRONG TRANSLATION!!! This sentence says that anything that is both a wolf and a tiger eats meat.

Introductory Logic quantifier. WÎ: Î is a woman. The existential quantifier can be confusing with “both” as well. “Both some men and some women study logic. Consider the sentence.” and the following interpretation: D: People LÎ: Î studies logic MÎ: Î is a man. We mustn’t translate the sentence this way: ›x[(Mx & Wx) & Lx] This sentence says that someone is both a man and a woman and also studies logic. So we’ll need two existential quantifiers to express it. Again we can treat the sentence as a conjunction: ›x(Mx & Lx) & ›x(Wx & Lx) However. We want a sentence like this: œx( x is ____________ ÷ x eats meat) How shall we fill in the blank? Remember the English sentence: “Wolves and tigers eat meat. 172 . one a man who studies logic and one a woman who studies logic. That’s because the original English sentence can be only made true by the existence of two things.” What must a thing be in order for the sentence to declare it a meat eater? It must be either a wolf or a tiger. you must disjoin the predicates with “w”. in this case there is no way to translate this sentence using just one existential quantifier. So the blank is filled in thus: œx( x is either a wolf or a tiger ÷ x eats meat) and the correct translation is œx[(Wx w Tx) ÷ Mx] The moral is that to pick out all the things which you can select with two predicates.

Monadic Quantification

Exercises 6-7 Translate the sentences into L2 using the given interpretation. D: People BÎ: Î bicycles every day. HÎ: Î is healthy. JÎ: Î jogs every day. PÎ: Î has high blood pressure. Î has a sedentary job. SÎ: WÎ: Î works in my office. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Everyone who bicycles every day is healthy. Some who have sedentary jobs are not healthy. A person who is healthy and jogs every day does not have high blood pressure. A person who bicycles every day and does not have high blood pressure works in my office. Only those who are unhealthy have high blood pressure. No one who jogs every day bicycles every day. The only people in my office who are unhealthy are those that neither jog every day nor bicycle every day. Only healthy people bicycle every day. Some people who bicycle every day are not healthy although they do not have high blood pressure. Not everyone who jogs every day is healthy but everyone who bicycles every day is. Some who have sedentary jobs, but not those who bicycle every day, are not healthy. Everyone who has a sedentary job and neither bicycles every day nor jogs every day is unhealthy unless he does not have high blood pressure.

D: The Stick Figures to the left EÎ: Î has an “E” above it. 173

Introductory Logic LÎ: Î has an “L” above it YÎ: Î has a “Y” above it.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Figures with an “E” above them have either an “L” above them or a “Y” above them. Some figures with an “E” above them have a “Y” above them also. Only figures with an “E” above them have an “L” above them. The only figures that have an “E” above them that do not have an “L” above them have a “Y” above them. Only figures that have a “Y” above them have neither an “E” nor an “L” above them. Every figure has either an “L” or a “Y” above it, but some figures don’t have an “E” above them. D: {1, 2, 3} AÎ: Î is in {1, 2} MÎ: Î is in {2} TÎ: Î is in {2, 3}

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

A number is in {2} only if it is in both {1, 2} and {2, 3} Only the numbers that are both in {1, 2} and in {2, 3} are in {2}. Some numbers are both in {1, 2} and {2, 3}. Some numbers in {2, 3} are not in {1, 2}. Every number in both {1, 2} and {2} is also in {2, 3}. Every number in {2} is in {2, 3} and so are some numbers in {1, 2}. 8: Translation in to L2: Complex Sentences

The basic principles of translation into L2 are similar to the principles of translation into L1. The first principle is to proceed step by step, from the top down (or from the outside in). Always determine first what the principle logical operator of the whole sentence is. Next express the sentence in a sort of amalgam of L2 and English, and then proceed to translate the parts. Be sure to 174

Monadic Quantification insert appropriate parentheses at each stage; do not wait to put them in at the end. Doing some examples will help. Consider the following interpretation: D: EÎ: LÎ: PÎ: SÎ: WÎ: Days of the week Î is a weekend day Î is a day on which logic class meets Î is a day on which you party. Î is a day on which you do lots of studying. Î is a weekday.

Suppose we have to translate the following sentence: Every weekday you do lots of studying, but every weekend day you party. We must first determine what the principle logical operator of the sentence is. Here it is obviously indicated by the English word, “but” so we know that this sentence is a conjunction. We write down this: Every weekday you do lots of studying & every weekend day you party. (We don’t need to insert parentheses here, because they are outermost parentheses and may be dropped.) Now we translate the component sentences in any order. For each of these sentences we ask what the principle logical operator of the sentence is. The first one obviously has a universal quantifier as its main logical operator. To decide which quantifier is the main logical operator of a quantified sentence, ask whether the sentence is saying that all of some class of objects have some property or whether it is saying that one or more is. In this case, the first conjunct obviously says that all weekdays are days on which you do lots of studying. We can write the next approximation:

**œx(x is a weekday ÷ x is a day on which you do lots of
**

studying) & every weekend day you party. Notice that the parentheses are essential at this step. The first conjunct can now be rendered entirely in L2 : 175

Introductory Logic

**œx(Wx ÷ Sx) & every weekend day you party.
**

A similar analysis on the second conjunct yields the full sentence:

œx(Wx ÷ Sx) & œy(Ey ÷ Py)

(Note that it was not essential to choose a different variable for the second conjunct, “x” could have been used just as well.) Now consider a more complex sentence. Only weekdays on which logic class meets are days when you neither do lots of studying nor party. As we saw in the previous section, sentences that say “only suchand-suches are so-and-sos,” like this one, can be translated as denials of existential quantifications. We can thus render this at a first step like this: ~›x( ~(x is a weekday on which logic class meets) & x is a day when you neither to lots of studying nor party.) (Note again that all the parentheses are essential here.) To say that x is a weekday on which logic class meets is to say “Wx & Lx.” To say that x is a day on which you neither do lots of studying nor party is to say “~(Sx w Px).” So the whole is: ~›x( ~(Wx & Lx) & ~(Sx w Px) ) Finally, consider this sentence: A weekday on which logic class meets is a day on which you do lots of studying if any day is. The first difficulty with this sentence is to determine the main logical operator. Is the sentence a conditional, There is a day on which you do lots of studying ÷ every weekday on which logic class meets is a day on which you do lots of studying, 176

Monadic Quantification or is the universal quantifier the main logical operator:

**œx(x is a weekday on which logic class meets ÷ x is a day on
**

which you do lots of studying if any day is) Fortunately, these two are equivalent, so we needn’t choose between them. Either is correct. We will continue with the second one. The antecedent of the conditional is easy enough:

**œx[(Wx & Lx) ÷ x is a day on which you do lots of studying
**

if any day is] The consequent says that x is a day on which you do lots of studying if any day is; it’s obviously a conditional. It says that if there is a day on which you do lots of studying, x is such a day. So it is translated (›ySy ÷ Sx) and the whole becomes

œx[(Wx & Lx) ÷ (›ySy ÷ Sx)]

Notice that we used a new variable, “y,” with the existential quantifier. This is not strictly necessary, but it helps to make the L2 sentence more readable. When translating from L2 to English, it is usually best to proceed from the bottom up (or from inside out). Consider this sentence of L2:

œx[(Wx & Sx) ÷ (Lx ÷ ~Px)]

We can begin by translating the antecedent and consequent of the embedded conditional:

œx[ x is a weekday on which you do lots of studying ÷ if

logic class meets on x then x is a day on which you don’t party.] The sentence overall has the form of a universally quantified conditional, so we recognize that it is saying that all the things that satisfy the antecedent satisfy the consequent. Hence a first attempt at translating the whole might look like this: All days that are weekdays on which you do lots of studying are days such that if logic class meets on them, you don’t 177

Introductory Logic party on them. However, this is not good English. Recognizing what the sentence is trying to say, we can rewrite it into better English, thus: Every weekday on which you do lots of studying is a day on which you don’t party, provided logic class meets that day. Of course, this is not the only English sentence that we might use as a translation of our original sentence into L2. There are many subtly different ways to express sentences of L2 in English. For instance, we might have chosen this translation: Only days on which you don’t party if logic class meets are weekdays on which you do lots of studying. This is a very different English sentence than the one preceding it, but for logical purposes they are equivalent, and either is a good translation of our original sentence.

Exercises 6-8 Translate the given sentences into L2 using the interpretation given. D: Students FÎ: Î is a fraternity member Î is a student government office holder GÎ: MÎ: Î is male LÎ: Î is a logic student Î is a sorority member SÎ: WÎ: Î is female 178

~›y(Py & By) œx[(Ax & Bx) ÷ Gx] ~œz(Bz ÷ ~ Cz) œw[(Aw w Bw) ÷ ~Cw] œv[(Cv & Pv) ÷ ~(Av w Bv)] ›x(Gx & Ax) ÷ ›y[(Gy & ~Cy) & By] œz(Cz ÷ ~Bz) ÷ ~›w(Pw & Aw) ~›v[(Pv & Cv) & Av] w ›x(Px & Gx) 179 . Î is a respected physicist. on the basis of the given interpretation. D: People AÎ: Î claims to have been abducted by aliens in a flying saucer. Translate the following into good. but some female logic students are. A female student who is a sorority member is not a student government office holder unless she is a logic student. CÎ: Î is completely credible on the subject of aliens. 16. GÎ: Î is very gullible. BÎ: Î believes that aliens regularly visit earth in flying saucers. 3. 11. 17. 6. but there are no male sorority members or female fraternity members. PÎ: 10. Some male fraternity members are student government office holders. 9. If a male student is a logic student.1. 4. and male and female student government office holders. 13. 15. but no male logic stud ents are. There are male and female logic students. A male logic student is a fraternity member only if he is not a student government office holder. but both male and female students are student government office holders. 12. but some female students are both logic students and student government office holders. Only male students are fraternity members. 8. No sorority members are student government office holders. he is not also a student government office holder. 14. 2. 7. Monadic Quantification All fraternity members are male and all sorority members are female. 5. idiomatic English.

1.Introductory Logic Appendix: Syntax Rules for L2 Predicate letters: Upper case Roman letters with or without Arabic numeral subscripts. That’s all. Sentences: A sentence of L2 is a formula containing no free occurrences of any variable. 2. names: lower case Roman letters in the range a-u. 180 Quantifier Symbols: œ › Connectives: ~ & w ÷ ø Punctuation: ( ) . (Nothing is a formula unless it is so in virtue of the above rules. Freedom: An occurrence of a variable is free if and only if it is not bound. variables: lower case Roman letters in the range v-z. with or without Arabic numeral subscripts. that is. with or without Arabic numeral subscripts. If N and R are formulas. Bondage: an occurrence of a variable is bound if and only if it is within the scope of an occurrence of a quantifier containing the variable. A predicate followed by any number of singular terms is a(n atomic) formula.) Bondage and Freedom: Scope: The scope of an occurrence of a quantifier is the smallest sub-formula containing that occurrence of the quantifier. then so are: ~N (N & R) (N w R) (N ÷ R) (N ø R) any quantifier followed by N. the sub-formula of which it is the main logical operator. Vocabulary: Singular Terms: Formulas: A quantifier symbol followed by a single variable is a quantifier.

For example. here is a parse tree for “œx›y(Fx ÷ (Py & ›z(Gxyz ø Rxy))):” œx›y(Fx ÷ (Py & ›z(Gxyz ø ~Rxy))) ›y(Fx ÷ (Py & ›z(Gxyz ø ~Rxy))) Fx ÷ (Py & ›z(Gxyz ø ~Rxy)) Fx Py (Py & ›z(Gxyz ø ~Rxy)) ›z(Gxyz ø ~Rxy) Gxyz ø ~Rxy Gxyz ~Rxy Rxy 181 . the leaves of the parse tree will be atomic formulas.Monadic Quantification Parse Trees: Parse trees can be made for sentences of L2 on the basis of the syntax rules above just as they were for L1. For L2.

SÏÎ WRONG!! While the numbers in the English predicates that appear on the right side in any interpretation may in principle appear in any order. but could easily be confusing: D: People SÎÏ: Ï slapped Î 182 » Possibly confusing . many-place predicates don’t raise any new issues beyond those discussed in Chapter 6. The numbered blanks that follow the predicate letters in an interpretation must always appear in numerical order from left to right. “Gertrude slapped Alonzo. and never in any other order. In practice. and “›x›ySxy” says that someone slapped someone. For instance. 3-place. “Sag” says that Alonzo slapped Gertrude. sentences involving many place predicates can be much more complicated that those involving only one-place predicates.” We may also get the predicate. Thus the following is not wrong. “Î slapped Alonzo. “Î slapped Ï. 1: Predicates with more than one place We form logical predicates from English sentences by removing names from the sentences.Introductory Logic Chapter 7: Polyadic Quantification In this chapter we will learn how to use 2-place.” This last is a two-place (or dyadic) predicate. from the sentence. In principle. “›xSgx” says that Gertrude slapped someone.” we can get the predicate. and more place predicates in translating. D: People SÎÏ: Î slapped Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude “Sga” says that Gertrude slapped Alonzo. it will generally be best to write them in right to left order as well. “›xSxa” says that someone slapped Alonzo. Given this interpretation.

“The intersection of Î and Ï is south of the intersection of Ð and Ñ. because it has two terms following it. for instance. Alonzo read The Catcher in the Rye. Instead. because it has three terms following it.Polyadic Quantification a: Alonzo g: Gertrude On this interpretation “Sag” would say that Gertrude slapped Alonzo. Alonzo read The Catcher in the Rye and Raise High the Roof Beams. Carpenters. or better yet. the verb “read” can be both transitive and intransitive. use different letters. In this respect. Such double uses of predicate letters. hence an interpretation might look like this: D: People SÎÏ: Î slapped Ï SÎÏÐ: Î stood between Ï and Ð The first occurrence of “S” in the sentence above is interpreted by the last line of the interpretation. English is more flexible than L2. predicates may have more than two places. on the other hand. In L2. are likely to be confusing and should be avoided. From “Chelsea is a daughter of William and Hilary.” A careful reading of our syntax rules for L2 given in the appendix to chapter 6 will demonstrate that the following is an acceptable sentence of our language: Sagm & ~Sag Here we must treat the two occurrences of “S” as different predicates. though allowed. the second occurrence is interpreted by the middle line. use different subscripts on the predicate letters.” and from “The intersection of Main and Clinton is south of the intersection of Norton and Clinton” we can get. when different occurrences of a predicate 183 .” we can get “Î is a daughter of Ï and Ð. Someone who understands one probably understands the others.” Of course. In English. We can say any of the following: Alonzo read.

D: People LÎÏ: Î likes Ï OÎÏ: Î owes money to Ï RÎÏ: Î is rooming with Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude 1. but Gertrude is not rooming with anyone she likes. 8. but Gertrude does not owe money to anyone to whom Alonzo owes money. D: Positive Integers BÎÏÐ: Î is betweenÏ and Ð GÎÏ: Î is greater than Ï LÎÏ: Î is less than Ï RÎÏÐÑ: The ratio of Îto Ïis equal to the ratio of Ð to Ñ a: 1 b: 2 c: 3 d: 4 184 . Alonzo is rooming with someone he likes. the two occurrences need have nothing to do with each other. Alonzo owes money to someone and Gertrude owes money to someone. 6. 2. Alonzo owes money to someone. 7. but he doesn’t owe money to Gertrude. 3. translate the following sentences into L2. 5.Introductory Logic letter are followed by different numbers of terms. Alonzo owes money to someone. Gertrude doesn’t like anyone Alonzo is rooming with. 4. Gertrude owes money to someone that she does not like. but is not rooming with that person. Gertrude is rooming with someone who likes someone who is rooming with Alonzo. Alonzo likes everyone he rooms with. Exercises 7-1 Using the given interpretation.

3 is between 1 and 4. 21. then the ratio of this number to 1 is equal to the ratio of 4 to it. 14. 23. Either 1 is greater than 2 or 3 is greater than 2. There is some positive integer such that the ratio of it to 4 is equal to the ratio of 4 to 2. 12. but no positive integer is both greater than 4 and less than 4. 32. 27. 31. If 3 is greater than 1 then the ratio of 3 to 2 is not equal to the ratio of 2 to 4.Polyadic Quantification 9. Some positive integer is greater than 4 and some positive integer is less than 4. Some positive integer is greater than 4. 28. The ratio of 1 to 2 is equal to the ratio of 2 to 4. If a positive integer is greater than 1 and less than 3. Every positive integer greater than 3 is greater than 2. 11. Using the given interpretation. 30. 10. Any number between 1 and 3 is less than 4. 16. 29. 17. WÎÏ: Î is in the same writing class as Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude 25. 18. 22. 19. 13. idiomatic English. The ratio of 1 to 2 is equal to the ratio of 2 to 4 if and only if the ratio of 2 to 1 is equal to the ratio of 4 to 2. D: People DÎÏ: Î lives in the same dorm as Ï. Wag Wag & ~Dag ›xWax & ›xWgx ›y(Wya & Wyg) ›y(Wya & Wgy) ›z(Dza & Wzg) œw(Dwg ÷ Waw) œv[(Wvg & Dvg) ÷ Wav] 185 . but not both. 3 is greater than 2 and 1 but not greater than 4 If 1 is greater than 2 then 2 is greater than 4. 1 is less than 2 and 2 is less than 4 if and only if 2 is between 1 and 4. translate the sentence of L2 into smooth. 26. 2 is between 1 and 4 but not between 3 and 4. 24. 1 is greater than no positive integer. 15. 20.

For instance. and that everyone at the party was kissed by someone or other. respectively.” these say. Could mean either of: œx›yKxy ›yœxKxy The two L2 sentences differ only in the order of the initial quantifiers.” which says that someone at the party was kissed by everyone there. “›xKxg” that someone at the party kissed Gertrude. and “›yKay” that Alonzo kissed someone who was at the party. Sentences with two identical quantifiers are also straightforward: “›x›yKxy” says that someone at the party kissed someone at the party. on this interpretation.” This English sentence might be thought to say that everyone at the party bestowed a kiss. Both of these in turn must be distinguished from “œx›yKxy” and “œz›wKwz. Consider “›xœyKxy. It may help to spell out exactly what the two sentences 186 . that everyone at the party kissed someone or other. Sentences with two unlike quantifiers can be trickier.Introductory Logic 2: Translating Quantifiers and Polyadic Predicates Some uses of quantifiers with polyadic predicates are straightforward. and the two readings of the English sentence can be expressed unambiguously in these sentences of L2: English: Everyone kissed someone. No sentence of L2 is ambiguous. or it might be understood as saying that everyone at the party kissed one and the same person (perhaps Gertrude).” for example. It needs to be distinguished from “›xœyKyx. It says that someone at the party kissed everyone there. D: People at the party last night KÎÏ: Î kissed Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude “Kag” says that Alonzo kissed Gertrude. and “œzœwKzw” says that everyone at the party kissed everyone at the party. I have used the phrase “someone or other” rather than simply “someone” in order to try to counter the ambiguity of “Everyone at the party kissed someone who was there. without saying anything about whether all kissed the same person.

in other words. and Gertrude were all the people at the party last night. “Leonardo is sexier than anyone. “›yKxy.Polyadic Quantification of L2 say. when we say “everyone. The first begins with a universal quantifier.” This says everyone kissed Gertrude. that is.” she almost certainly does not mean to claim literally that Leonardo is sexier than himself. Another complication concerns the difference between “everyone” and “everyone else. that is. Fran.” we mean everyone. then since Gertrude is someone. It will be true if some one thing in the domain satisfies the open sentence following the quantifier. and so forth.31 We can use binary predicates in more complicated sentences. The other sentence begins with an existential quantifier. suppose we add an additional predicate to our interpretation: D: People at the party last night CÎ: Î is cute KÎÏ: Î kissed Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude Suppose we wish to translate into L2 the English sentence. Donna. Carey kissed someone. This sentence will be true if everything in the domain satisfies the open sentence following the quantifier. We won’t say it until the last chapter.” we will say it. If it is true.” Consider the sentence. she must also have kissed Gertrude.” In other words. She has gotten carried away in her enthusiasm. When we mean “everyone else. For instance. because until then we will have no way of saying it in a formal language. In this book. If Alonzo. Bill kissed someone. This may not be what someone meant to say in saying “Everyone kissed Gertrude. Edgar. Don’t let this carelessness infect your speech. she meant to say that Leonardo is sexier than anyone else. “œxKxy. then “œx›yKxy” will be true if and only if Alonzo kissed someone. “œxKxg.” This sentence will be satisfied by things that kissed someone. it will be true if there is one person that everyone kissed. 187 31 .” If your younger sister says. Carey. only if each of them kissed someone or other. and we often understand what they meant to say without noting carefully what they did say. Bill. People are typically careless and lazy in speech.

We analyze that sentence in the same way. We can also say that Gertrude was kissed by every cute person at the party. It is a universal generalization. things work differently. This is one of the many ways in which L2 is very different from English. we must first recognize that it is a universal generalization. So we must begin by putting it into our basic form for universal generalizations: œx(x is cute ÷ x was kissed by Gertrude) To say that x was kissed by Gertrude is obviously to say that Gertrude kissed x. How? 188 32 . We can say either.” To translate this sentence.” or “Gertrude was kissed by Alonzo. this will be: œx(Cx ÷ Kxg) This differs from the previous sentence only in the order of the terms following the predicate “K.” The terms occur in the same order in English.Introductory Logic “Gertrude kissed everyone at the party who was cute. but the passive voice and the preposition are used to change who is kissing whom.” In L2. So we have: œx(x is cute ÷ Gertrude kissed x) which is obviously œx(Cx ÷ Kgx)32 Note that although Gertrude’s name comes at the beginning of the English sentence. it comes very near the end of the L2 sentence. Following the same pattern as above. It says that everyone at the party who was cute was kissed by Gertrude. “Gertrude kissed Alonzo. who is kissing whom is determined by the order of the terms. Suppose we want to say that Gertrude kissed everyone who kissed Alonzo. so we begin this: œz(z kissed Alonzo ÷ Gertrude kissed z) Note that this sentence can be true even if Gertrude never kissed anyone. In English.

Polyadic Quantification Once we have made this beginning. Consider the following interpretation: D: People at the party last night and times BÎÏ: Î is earlier than Ï CÎ: Î is cute KÎÏÐ: Î kissed Ï at Ð PÎ: Î is a person TÎ: Î is a time a: Alonzo e: Ethel g: Gertrude m: midnight last night Using an interpretation like this. The key to saying this is that we understand it as saying that there is a time at which he kissed Gertrude and that time is before midnight. the category of persons who kissed someone who kissed Alonzo. Polyadic predicates are useful for translating temporal facts. 189 . Consider this sentence: œw(›z(Kwz & Kza) ÷ Kgw) This says that Gertrude kissed everyone in some category of persons at the party. So the original sentence says that Gertrude kissed everyone who kissed someone who kissed Alonzo. and you may have to take a moment to think through the meaning of the L2 sentence. This thought is quite complicated. we can see easily how to finish: œz(Kza ÷ Kgz) Sentences in L2 can express quite complicated ideas in a small space. we can say that Alonzo kissed Gertrude at midnight: Kagm We can also say that Alonzo kissed Gertrude before midnight.” that is. but what category is it? It is the category of persons who satisfy “›z(Kwz & Kza).

and the first of these is earlier than the second. it will be helpful to proceed step by step. First we see that the general form is this: ›x(x is a time & [Alonzo kissed Ethel at x & x is earlier than every time at which Alonzo kissed Gertrude]) The first two conjuncts are translated easily thus: ›x([Tx & [Kaex & x is earlier than every time at which Alonzo kissed Gertrude]) The right conjunct is a universal generalization. so the next pass gives us this: ›x(Tx & [Kaex & œy(y is a time at which Alonzo kissed Gertrude ÷ x is earlier than y)]) And now the whole sentence is easily seen to be: ›x(Tx & [Kaex & œy([Ty & Kagy] ÷ Bxy)]) Exercises 7-2 190 . To translate this into L2. then Gertrude again.. This is a bit tricky.” We do this because the English sentence we are translating says that “there is a time . then Ethel. “Tv.. It will not do to say that there is a time at which Alonzo kissed Ethel and a time at which he kissed Gertrude.Introductory Logic ›v[Tv & (Bvm & Kagv)] Note that we must specify that v is a time. which we do by including the conjunct. Probably the English sentence means that he kissed Ethel at some time before every time at which he kissed Gertrude. because we have to consider the possibility that Alonzo kissed each of them several times. to say that we must say that Alonzo kissed her at some time: ›x(Tx & Kagx) We can say that Alonzo kissed Ethel before he kissed Gertrude. for that could be true if he kissed Gertrude first.” Note also that on this interpretation we can no longer say simply that Alonzo kissed Gertrude.

[Hint: Remember that Alonzo is not Eustace’s father. but he’s not older than Gertrude. and Gertrude is Eustace’s mother. Alonzo is taller than someone he likes. but neither likes anyone. Alonzo is older than someone and Gertrude is older than someone. 191 . and Gertrude is someone’s mother. Alonzo is older than someone. 3. 11. Alonzo is Gertrude’s father. but Gertrude is not taller than anyone she likes.) 9. 5. D: People Î is female FÎ: MÎ: Î is male PÎÏ: Î is a parent of Ï SÎÏ: Î is a spouse of Ï a: Alonzo e: Eustace g: Gertrude (Note: for these exercises. 2. Alonzo is a male parent of someone. assume the kinship system common in the United States. Alonzo is older than someone. Alonzo likes everyone he is taller than. 4. 10. 13. Alonzo is Eustace’s uncle. 7. Gertrude is taller than someone who likes someone who is taller than Alonzo. Gertrude doesn’t like anyone Alonzo is taller than. D: People OÎÏ: Î is older than Ï LÎÏ: Î likes Ï TÎÏ: Î is taller than Ï a: Alonzo g Gertrude 1. 8. 6. but he is not taller than that person. Alonzo is Eustace’s grandfather. 12.Polyadic Quantification Translate the following into L2 using the interpretation given.] Alonzo is married to Gertrude’s sister. but not to Gertrude. Gertrude is older than someone she does not like.

24. œx(Px ÷ ›yTxy) œx[Sx ÷ ›y(Py & Axy)] œx[Px ÷ ›y(Sy & Dyx)] ~›w[Pw & œz([Sz & Twz] ÷ Azw)] œz[Sz ÷ ›w(Pw & Azw)] œx›yAxy & œx›yDxy ~›v[Pv & œz([Sz & Tvz] ÷ Dvz)] ›x[Px & (›y[Sy & Ayx] & ›z[Sz & Dzx])] Translate the following into L2 using the interpretation provided. automobiles. Gertrude is Eustace’s mother-in-law. and times Î is a car CÎ: BÎÏÐ: Î bought Ï at Ð FÎ: Î is a Ford LÎÏ: Î is later than Ï MÎ: Î is a Mazda Î is a person PÎ: TÎ: Î is a time e: Ethel g: Gertrude b: Ethel’s birthday (October 18) 25. idiomatic English.] 16. Also. [Hint: there are two ways one can be someone’s sister-in-law: one can be a sister of a spouse or a wife of a sibling. Gertrude is Alonzo’s sister-in-law. 192 Ethel bought a Ford on her birthday. 22. Alonzo is Gertrude’s first cousin. D: People PÎ: Î is a professor SÎ: Î is a student AÎÏ: Î admires Ï DÎÏ: Î despises Ï TÎÏ: Î teaches Ï 17. one’s sister-in-law is not one’s spouse.Introductory Logic 14. . translate the given sentence into smooth. 21. 20.] Using the given interpretation. 19. D: People. 18. 23. 15. [Hint: first cousins are not siblings.

Polyadic Quantification Ethel bought a Ford when Gertrude bought a Mazda. [Hint: this does not mean that every time is one at which Gertrude buys a Ford!] 3: Small domains with Polyadic Predicates Small domains can be helpful in understanding sentences with polyadic predicates. For instance: D: the stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï GÎÏ: A broken arrow goes from Î to Ï It is a bit more difficult to accommodate three and four place predicates. [Hint: understand a used car to be one that had been previously bought by someone. Someone bought a Ford when Gertrude bought a Mazda. Gertrude has never bought a Mazda. 30. 27. 28. but some variation of the following technique may do: D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏÐ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï and then to Ð. 193 . with predicates of two and more places small domains can help with understanding sentences of L2. Let us consider diagrams first. Just as with 1-place predicates. 29. 31. 32. Gertrude bought a used car. A natural way to represent such predicates is with arrows. Gertrude has always bought Fords.26. For our diagrams to accommodate predicates of more than one place we need a way of representing such predicates in the diagrams.] Ethel bought a car that Gertrude had previously bought. Gertrude bought a car before Ethel’s birthday.

It says that there is a stick figure to which an arrow goes from every stick figure. for instance: D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï These are not the only diagrams that make these sentences true. There are diagrams that make both sentences true and diagrams that make neither sentence true. But “›yœxFxy” is false. we’d need an interpretation like this.Introductory Logic We can use our diagrams to illustrate the difference between “œx›yFxy” and “›yœxFxy. We’ll use the notation of pointy 194 . To make “›yœxFxy” true. It says that from every stick figure in the diagram an arrow goes to some stick figure or other. D: The Stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï On this interpretation. If we want to use small domains in the positive integers we must have a way of representing relations. We can also use small numerical domains. “œx›yFxy” is true.” Consider the following interpretation. as well as diagrams that make one or the other sentence true. we must spell out the pairs for which it holds. Try to construct some of these other diagrams and figure out which of the sentences are made true on the corresponding interpretations. To spell out a relation.

<1. <1. <1. 195 .) A relation may be represented by the set of all pairs for which it holds. 3} FÎÏÐ: <Î. 2. Ð> is in {<1. Ï> is in {<2. Ï. <2. If we number the figures in the four previous diagrams above from left to right. <2. in that order. 2>. and between 2 and 1. 1. 3>} D: {1. Ï> is in {<1. For instance. 2} FÎÏ: <Î. 2. 2>. Ï> is in {<1. For instance. so “<1. a two-place relation may be interpreted this way: RÎÏ: <Î. 2> is not the same as <2. Ð> is in {<1. 2>. SÎÏÐ: <Î. but between no other pairs of numbers. A relation of more than two places can be represented in the same way. This provides a good exercise in understanding the abstraction involved in using L2. 2>} GÎÏ: <Î. 2} FÎÏ: <Î. 2. <2. 2. Ï> is in {<1. 1. (Note that these are ordered pairs. Ï. 2>” will indicate the pair consisting of 1 and 2. except that there will be more items between the pointy brackets. 2>} Try to understand how these interpretations are related to those given by the diagrams. 1>.Polyadic Quantification brackets (<>) to indicate pairs. those four diagrams would correspond to the following numerical interpretations: D: {1. 2} FÎÏ: <Î. Ï> is in {<1. 1>} D: {1. 1>. 3}. 3>} could assign to “S” the same interpretation as would SÎÏÐ: Î + Ï = Ð when limited to the same domain.1>} D: {1. 3>. 1>} This relation holds between 1 and 2. with a domain limited to {1.

8. 5. 2. 6. 3.Introductory Logic Exercises 7-3 Tell whether the following sentences are true or false on the given interpretations. D: The Stick figures to the left FÎ: Î has an “F” above it GÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï 1. 4. œx›yGxy ›yœxGxy œz(Fz ÷ ›wGzw) ›v(Fv & ›x~Gxv) ›y›z[(Fy & ~Fz) & Gyz] œw›z(Fz & Gwz) ~›v›y[Fy & (Gvy & Gyv)] ›x[Fx & ›z(Fz & ~Gxz)] D: The stick figures to the left MÎ: Î has an “M” above it RÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï 196 . 7.

by people who understand them. 22. Consider this sentence: Everyone does not support the President. 16. 2>} 17. Sentences of L2 can often be used. 2} {1. 21.Polyadic Quantification 9. This might say that no person supports the President. œx›yRxy ›yœxRxy œz[Mz ÷ ›w(Rww & Rwz)] ›vœz(Mz ÷ Rvz) ~›w›x(Rwx & Rxw) ›y~›v(Mv & Ryv) œz(~Mz ÷ œwRzw) œx[Rxx ÷ ›y(My & Ryx)] D: {1. 19. Sentences of L2 are never ambiguous. 23. or it might be taken to be the denial of the claim that everyone supports the President. 18. using the indicated interpretation: 197 . Negation in English is a fruitful source of ambiguity in quantified sentences. <2. 11. 24. 12. The first reading of the sentence gets this translation. 10. 15. œx›yLxy ›yœxLxy ›zœy(By ÷ Lyz) ›x›z[(Bx & Bz) & (Lxz & Lzx)] œz[Bz ÷ ›w(Bw & Lzw)] ~œy(By ÷ ›vLvy) œw[Bw ÷ ~›y(By & Lyw)] ›v~›x(~Lxx & Lxv) 4: Ambiguities in English English sentences involving quantifiers can be ambiguous. 20. even though many sentences of English are. to explain clearly and succinctly the different possible readings of an ambiguous sentence.2} BÎ: LÎÏ: {<1. 13. 2>. 14.

Some ambiguities concern the order in which the quantifiers occur. D: Persons. but they make quite different claims. There are four different ways of understanding this sentence. to be ambiguous in this way. The first claims that no one supports the President.Introductory Logic D: People SÎÏ: Î supports Ï p: The President œx~Sxp while the second reading of the sentence gets this translation (using the same interpretation): ~œxSxp These two sentences of L2 differ only in the placement of the tilde. and each of them has a different translation into L2. objects. Consider the following English sentence: Some person is hit by a car every day. The best one can do is offer one translation for each distinct reading the sentence has. Of course there is no particular need.” or “No one supports the president. and days CÎ: Î is a car Î is a day DÎ: HÎÏÐ: Î hits Ï on Ð PÎ: Î is a person This reading would be represented thus in L2: œx(Dx ÷ ›y›z[(Py & Cz) & Hzyx]) 198 . One can say either. The sentence might say that on each and every day a collision occurs between some car or other and some person or other. If one is asked to translate an ambiguous sentence of English into L2. one is confronted with a dilemma: no one translation is correct. in English. “Not everyone supports the President. Given this interpretation. the second only that some people fail to do so.” Neither of these sentences is ambiguous.

4. 5. Exercises 7-4 Translate the following sentences into L2 using the interpretation supplied.Polyadic Quantification But the sentence might also (less plausibly) assert that there is some one particular person who is involved in a collision every day. If a sentence is ambiguous. Everyone in the room did not see Gertrude in the corridor. (Note: Not every sentence is ambiguous. the sentence might assert that there is a car that each day is involved in a collision with some person or other: ›x(Cx & œy[Dy ÷ ›z(Pz & Hxzy)]) Finally.) D: People RÎ: Î was in the room SÎÏ: Î saw Ï in the corridor g: Gertrude 1. Not everyone in the room saw Gertrude in the corridor. this would be translated thus: ›x(Px & œy[Dy ÷ ›z(Cz & Hzxy)]) Yet again. but some are. provide a translation for each of its possible readings. the sentence might assert that there are a particular person and a particular car that collide each day: ›x(Px & ›y[Cy & œz(Dz ÷ Hyxz)]) Not all of these readings of our original sentence are equally plausible. 3. Everyone in the room saw Gertrude in the corridor. Everyone in the room did not see someone in the corridor. Also note that a sentence is not ambiguous simply because it has more than one translation into L2 A genuinely ambiguous sentence must have two or more non-equivalent translations into L2. Everyone in the room saw someone in the corridor. but each is a possible reading. and in some context would be the natural one. and perhaps least plausibly. 2. 199 .

Introductory Logic 6. No one in the room saw anyone in the corridor. 7. 200 . No one in the room saw someone in the corridor.

but in the case of L1 we were able to simplify the survey of all the infinite numbers of interpretations by concentrating on the finite number of truth value assignments possible. 1: Quantificational logical relations Logical relations in L2 are defined much as we defined logical relations in L1. the only technique for that is to provide derivations. and there is in general no mechanical procedure for testing whether logical relations hold. sets of sentences inconsistent. We will also learn how to show that arguments are not quantificationally valid. and these are the topic of chapters 9 and 10. sentences of L2 are their own forms. Definition: A set of sentences of L2 is quantificationally inconsistent if and only if there is no interpretation on which all of its sentences are true. and how to show that two sentences are not quantificationally equivalent. Once again. Notice that these definitions apply just as well to L1 as to L2. or pairs of sentences equivalent. (The proof of 201 . The major difference is that there is no shortcut involving truth tables. Definition: Two sentences of L2 are quantificationally equivalent if and only if there is no interpretation which makes one of them true and the other false. No such simplification is possible for L2.e. Instances of forms are just sentences with interpretations. that it is quantificationally consistent). Hence we may define the logical relations this way: Definition: An argument of L2 is quantificationally valid if and only if there is no interpretation on which the premises are all true and the conclusion false.Quantificational Logical Relations Chapter 8: Quantificational Relations In this chapter we will learn how to define quantificational validity. We shall not learn how to show arguments valid. how to show that a set of sentences is not quantificationally inconsistent (i.. quantificational inconsistency. and quantificational equivalence.

But to make the premise true. or one whose domain is a small set of positive integers. because no figure 202 .) To show that logical relations do not hold. we must use ingenuity in constructing interpretations that show this. That gives us the following diagram and interpretation: D: The stick figure to the left EÎ: Îhas an “E” above it IÎ: Î has an “I” above it. either one whose domain is the set of stick figures in a drawing accompanying the interpretation. To show the argument invalid. To make it possible to check whether a given interpretation makes a particular sentence true or false. On this diagram the premise is true. we want to make the premise true and the conclusion false. But the conclusion is false. We cannot make this figure both E and I. To show that they do hold. because every figure has either an “E” or an “I” above it. Consider the following argument: œx(Ex w Ix). Let’s make it E. Let’s see how we might go about showing an argument invalid. the conclusion says that something is both E and I. because that would make the conclusion of the argument true. so we want there to be nothing that is both E and I. ˆ ›x(Ex & Ix) The premise says that everything is either E or I.Introductory Logic this is beyond the scope of this course. we shall require that whenever possible the interpretations be those using small finite domains that we have discussed previously. that is. First we must choose a size for our domain. A domain of one member is sufficient in this case. but we want everything to be one or the other. as the premise says. we must provide a derivation (using the rules introduced in the next two chapters). we’ll have to make it one or the other.

For instance. We could just as well have used an interpretation in the positive integers. ›xMx. ›xJx. We might try a one-member domain. and the first will then require an “L” above it also. œx(Jx ÷ ~Yx) all we need to do is find an interpretation which makes all three sentences true. For instance. and some trial and error may be involved in constructing an interpretation. To show this argument invalid. which is not what we want. The diagram at the left can be used to provide such an interpretation: D: The stick figures to the left. like this: D: {1} EÎ: Î is in {1} IÎ: Î is in {} Other arguments may require larger domains. Our interpretation will need something that is J and something that is Y. to show the following set of sentences consistent. LÎ: Î has an “L” above it MÎ Î has an “M” above it We can show sets of sentences consistent and pairs of sentences non-equivalent in a similar way. as the conclusion says. ›xYx. ˆ œx(Lx & Mx) We look for a small domain in which this argument can be shown invalid. making the conclusion true. like the one to the left. consider the following invalid argument: ›x(Lx ø Mx). but since (according to the third sentence) 203 . remembering which sentences are to be shown true and which false. we will need a domain with at least two items in it. But then the second premise will require us to put an “M” above that item.Quantificational Logical Relations has both letters above it.

so that is not the right strategy. here is one: D: The stick figures to the left FÎ: Î has an “F” above it GÎ: Î has a “G” above it Here’s another. we’ll need two distinct things. or by making at least one thing fail to be F and at least one thing fail to be G. this will work as well: D: {1. in order to make the right sentence true. then both sentences will be true. A little thought will show that there is no way to make the left sentence (“A thing is F if and only if it is G”) true and the right sentence (“Everything is F if and only if everything is G”) false. 2} JÎ: Î is in {1} YÎ: Î is in {2} If we wish to show the two sentences. We can make the right sentence true in either of two ways: by making everything F and also G. Alternatively.Introductory Logic a J thing isn’t Y. different from the first: D: {1. If we make everything both F and G. œx(Fx ø Gx) œxFx ø œxGx non-equivalent. we need to find an interpretation that makes one of the two sentences true and the other false. Hence we must try to make at least one thing not F and at least one thing not G. 2} FÎ: Î is in {1} GÎ: Î is in {} 204 . So we must make the right sentence true and the left sentence false. There are several ways to do this while making the left sentence false. So this interpretation will work: D: The stick figures to the left JÎ: Î has a “J” above it YÎ: Î has a “Y” above it.

8. 12. ˆ œxCx ›x(Bx ÷ Cx). ˆ œx(Ex ø Dx) œx(Fx ÷ Gx). 342372 205 . and Schönfinkel. ˆ ›xBx ›x(Bx ÷ Cx). œx(Fx ÷ Hx). ›xCx. 9. Exercises 8-1 For each of the following. 16. ˆ ~›xCx œx[(Px w Qx) ÷ Rx]. ˆ œx(Hx ÷ Gx) Show that the following are not equivalent 11. œx›y(Mx ø Hy) ›xFx ÷ Ga ›xFx & ›xGx œxFx w œxGx ›x(Fx w Ga) œx(Fx ø Gx) 33 œxMx ø ›yHy ›x(Fx ÷ Ga) ›x(Fx & Gx) œx(Fx w Gx) ›x(Fx w Gb) œxFx ø œxGx The proof of this is beyond the scope of this book. we will not require finite domains of more than three items. 6. ›xBx. or a pair of sentences non-equivalent. then if an argument is invalid. finite domain that shows the argument invalid. ˆ ›x(Hx & Fx) œx(Bx ÷ Cx).33 In some cases. 3. 13. provide an interpretation with a small. 15. P. ˆ ›x(Gx & ~Hx) œx(Ax ÷ Cx). there will always be an interpretation with a finite domain on which the sentences are true and false as required to show that the logical operations do not hold. ˆ ›xCx œx(Fx ÷ Gx). ˆ ›x~Rx ÷ ~›xQx ›x(Dx & Ex) w ›x(Rx & Ex). M.Quantificational Logical Relations If all the predicates in our sentences are monadic (1-place). See Bernays.” Mathematische Annalen. ›xBx. or a set of sentences consistent. 14. In our exercises. 99 (1928). 5. the domain might be large. “Zum Entscheidungproblem der mathematischen Logic. ›xGx. in general one can only say that if the sentences have n distinct predicates.. however. œx(Hx ÷ Gx). ˆ œx(Gx ÷ Fx) Fa. ›x~Gx. 1. 10. ›xFx. œx(Hx ÷ ~Fx). 2. there will be an interpretation in a domain of 2n or fewer items. 7. ›x~Px. 4. œx(Cx ÷ ~Ax).

~›zFz 2: Logical Relations with Polyadic Predicates The definitions of the quantificational logical relations are the same for polyadic preciates as for monadic ones. 19. Indeed. œx(Nx ÷ Gx). We should begin by noting that the premise requires that each item in the domain have an arrow going from it to itself. However. “œy(Fxy 206 . If this is not obvious. by finding appropriate interpretations. For instance. ~œx(~Fx w Gx) (~›xFx ÷ ›xFx) w ~Fa. remember that the first premise will be true if but only if the open sentence. œx(Fx ÷ Gx) 18. suppose we wish to show this argument invalid: œxœy(Fxy w Fyx) ˆ ›xœyFxy We know that the interpretation we need will look something like this: D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï We need to figure out how many stick figures we need and exactly where to draw the arrows in the diagram. it can be more challenging to find the interpretations we want. the definitions (given at the beginning of the previous section) make no mention of whether the predicates are monadic or polyadic. So we show that the relations do not hold for sentences in the same way. ›x(Mx ø Nx) œy(œxFx ÷ Gy) ›xMx ø ›xNx Show the following sets of sentences are consistent. because the sentences involving polyadic predicates can make more complex statements. œx(Ax ÷ ~Bx) œx(Fx ÷ Gx) ÷ ›xNx. œx(Ax ÷ Bx). 21.Introductory Logic 17. 20.

of course. So let us try two figures. With two figures. so we have shown the argument invalid. which says that an arrow goes from some figure to all figures. But still the second premise. a must have an arrow from itself to itself. finite domain to show 207 . and with one figure we cannot make the conclusion false. Everything. is true. and each with an arrow going to one other. say a. Now if this open sentence is true of some item. like this: D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï Now we have an interpretation on which the premise is true and the conclusion is false. that is. Unfortunately. So a must either have an arrow coming from itself to itself or an arrow going from itself to itself. we will need to have an arrow from each to itself and also an arrow from one to the other to make the first premise true. each with an arrow going from it to itself. D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï But now we can see that we will need more than one stick figure to show the argument invalid.Quantificational Logical Relations w Fyx)” is true of everything. So we’ll need to have three figures. and we need to make it false. For each figure must have an arrow from itself to itself. includes a itself.. it is not always possible to provide an interpretation in a small. everything must either have an arrow coming to or an arrow from a.

but there is no interpretation having a finite number of objects in its domain that makes all of these sentences true. on this interpretation all these sentences are true: D: positive integers FÎÏ: Î < Ï Although the proof is beyond the scope of this course. For an interpretation that makes them all true we need to have an infinite domain. however. ˆ ›x(Lx & œyMxy) œxœyœz[(Wxy & Wyz) ÷ Wxz).Introductory Logic that logical relations do not hold. 4. œx(Gx ÷ Dxx). it can be shown that every consistent set of sentences of L2 has an interpretation whose domain is the positive integers and which makes all the sentences of the set true. œxœy(Sxy ø Syx). ˆ œxSax ›x(Lx ÷ œyMxy). use an interpretation with a small. Exercises 8-2 For each of the following. ˆ ›x›y(Wxy & Wyx) ›xGx. 1. Most of our examples will require only small finite domains. œx›yWxy. 2. 3. If possible. provide an interpretation that shows the argument invalid. ›x(~Lx & œyMxy). finite domain. For instance. A finite domain would always suffice for sentences with only monadic predicates. a finite domain may not suffice. For instance. ˆ ›xœy(Gx & Dxy) Show that the following are not equivalent 5. consider the following set of sentences: œx›yFxy œxœyœz[(Fxy & Fyz) ÷ Fxz] ~›xFxx These sentences are consistent. 6. 208 œx[Fx ÷›y(By & Kxy)] ›x(Bx & œyDyx) ›x(Bx & œyDyx) œx[Fx ÷ œy(By ÷ Kxy)] œx(Bx & œyDyx) ›x(Bx & œyDxy) . ›xSxa. as we pointed out at the end of the previous section. 7. But when polyadic predicates are involved.

›x›y[Mxy & (~Nxy w ~Nyx)] 3: Confinement We can more easily understand some complex sentences of L2 by using confinement equivalences. consider this sentence: œx›y(Fx ÷ Gy) It may not be obvious at first what this sentence says.~Vaa. ›x~Rx & ›x~Px œx›y~Lxy. Some sentences of L2 are difficult to understand because they often have no natural English equivalent. œ<(N< & R) œ<(R & N<) œ<N< & R R & œ<N< 209 . N< is a formula containing the variable < free. ~›xœyJxy œxœy(Mxy ÷ Nxy). œx(Tx ÷Vxx). There are a group of equivalences which can help simplfy some sentences of L2 in the manner. ›x›y[(Cx & Cy) & ~Dxy] œxœy(Fxy ø Fyx). In each case the sentence in the left column and the corresponding sentence in the right column are equivalent. For instance. 13. NOTE: in the following. ~›x›y(Qx & Fxy) œx[(Rx w Px) ÷Tx].8. ›xœy~Hxy. œx›y(Fx ÷ Kyx) Quantificational Logical Relations ›x›y(Fx ÷ Kyx) Show the following sets of sentences are consistent. 12. R is a formula containing no free <. But this sentence is equivalent to a simpler one: ›xFx ÷ ›yGy which is easier to understand. 14. You will find it useful to master the following confinement equivalences. 10. ~œx~Lxx ›xœy(Hxy w Jxy). 9. By using them you can transform some complex sentences of L2 into sentences that are simpler to understand. ›xœy(Qy ÷ Fxy). œx(Cx ÷ ›yDxy). 11.

Introductory Logic ›<(N< & R) ›<(R & N<) œ<(N< w R) œ<(R w N<) ›<(N< w R) ›<(R w N<) œ<(N< ÷ R) œ<(R ÷ N<) ›<(N< ÷ R) ›<(R ÷ N<) ›<N< & R R & ›<N< œ<N< w R R w œ<N< ›<N< w R R w ›<N< ›<N< ÷ R R ÷ œ<N< œ<N< ÷ R R ÷ ›<N< Note that there are no confinement equivalences of the above pattern for “ø. 34 210 . ›x~(Fx & Ha) Second. if the antecedent of a conditional is involved. the quantifier is simply attached to the subformula containing the free variable. they only apply to quantified formulas in which a binary connective connects two formulas and only one of the two has the quantified variable free. Thus no confinement principles apply to these sentences: œx(Fx ÷ Gx). since the confinement equivalences concern equivalence. Keep in mind the following points about the confinement equivalences. as with the first example in this Note that œ<(N< ø R) is equivalent to (›<N< ÷ R) & (R ÷ œ<N<). ›<(N< ø R) is equivalent to (›<N< & R) w (›<~N< & ~R). However. Thus they license the claim that the following pairs are equivalent: œx›y(Fx ÷ Gy) œx(Fx ÷ ›yGy) ~œx(Fx ÷ Ja) ~(›xFx ÷ Ja) ›xBx & œx(Mx & Qa) ›xBx & (œxMx & Qa) Finally. but this does not fit the pattern above. œx›y[(Fx & Gy) ÷ (Fy & Gx)]. the quantifier must change type.”34 Further note that in all but two cases. notice that the confinement equivalences may apply more than once to a sentence. First. from universal to existential or from existential to universal. they may apply to subformulas as well as whole sentences. Similarly.

“›xFx” must be false as well. The resulting sentences are easier to understand than the originals. or pairs of sentences non-equivalent. named “a. like this 211 . So we need an interpretation in which one thing. The second sentence is also a conditional. the third sentence is an existentially quantified conjunction. Ga ÷ œxHx. We can easily see that “Ga” must be false to make the third sentence true. to make the first sentence true.Quantificational Logical Relations section: œx›y(Fx ÷ Gy) is equivalent to œx(Fx ÷ ›yGy) which is in turn equivalent to ›xFx ÷ ›yGy Keeping the confinement equivalences in mind sometimes makes it easier to understand complex sentences of L2 and hence to find interpretations that can show arguments invalid. œx(Ga ÷ Hx). if “Ga” is false. so it does not change type. If “Ga” is false. In confining to the antecedent of the conditional. Finally. ›y(~Ga & ~Fy) It is easier to see what an interpretation must be like to make these three sentences true if we consider the following equivalents: ›xFx ÷ Ga. ~Ga & ›y~Fy Since the first of our original sentences was a universally quantified conditional whose consequent did not contain the quantified variable. then automatically the second sentence will be true. sets of sentences consistent. suppose we wish to show that the following sentences are consistent: œx(Fx ÷ Ga). Finally.” is not G and nothing is F. but there the quantifier is confined to the consequent. For instance. Here the quantifier can be confined to the right conjunct. we could confine the quantifier to the antecedent. the quantifier must change from universal to existential.

6. ›xœy(Gay÷Gxx). Use the confinement equivalences to simplify the sentences. Mondaic Exercises: 1. ›z~Fz ›x(Nx & Gd). œx(Fx w ›yGy). œz~(Mz w Ma). œx[Hx ÷ ›y(My w Jn)].Introductory Logic one: D: The stick figure to the left FÎ: Î has an “F” above it GÎ: Î has a “G” above it. œx~(Bx & Cc) œx›y(Hxa ÷Gxy). ›x(Bx w Acc). 8. 3. finite domain. ›x~Gx 4: Expansion in Finite Domains If we want to understand what a quantified sentence says on an interpretation with a small. ›x(Bx ÷ Pj) ›xœy(Hx w My). œx(Gx ÷ Ld). œx(Hax w Hxa) œx›y(Rxy ÷ Mx). where possible. Exercises 8-3 Find interpretations showing the following sentences consistent. œxœy›z(Rxy ÷ Rzx) œxœy(Fxy ÷ Ga). œx(Gx ø Ha). sometimes it helps 212 . 7. ›x~(Nx & Lx) ›x(~Pj w Bx). a: The stick figure to the left. 2. ›y(Ga & Fy). 4. ›x(~Mx & ~›zJz) Polyadic Exercises: 5. ~œx(›yAxy ÷ Bc). ›x(Bj & Px).

The same thing is true of more complicated quantified sentences. it is in many ways more tractable. If we want to know how to make it false. it will be true if and only if “Fa w Fb” is true. If there are only two items in the domain of an interpretation. We can expand this sentence further. consider the sentence.” this will be true if and only if (Fa & œxGx) w (Fb & œxGx) is true. consider the sentence “›x(Fx & œxGx). we can use a truth table. If we add to our interpretation names for the two members of the domain: D: {The Pope. The “œxGx” that occurs twice in the sentence immediately above will be true in the domain we are talking about if and only if “Ga & Gb” is true there. For instance. Madonna} FÎ: Î is a Roman Catholic then “œxFx” will be true if and only if both the Pope and Madonna are Roman Catholics. For instance. So we may say that our original sentence is true in this domain if and only if (*) (Fa & (Ga & Gb)) w (Fb & (Ga & Gb)) is true there. on that interpretation. Similarly. named “a” and “b.” On an interpretation with only two items in its domain. Although this sentence is much longer than the original.Quantificational Logical Relations to find a quantifier-free sentence that says the same thing. And since (*) is true on this interpretation if and only if 213 . In other words. Madonna} FÎ: Î is a Roman Catholic a: The Pope b: Madonna then we can say that on this interpretation “œxFx” is true if and only if “Fa & Fb” is true. “›xFx” will be true if and only if at least one of the Pope and Madonna is a Roman Catholic. You can readily see that if “Fa” and “Gb” are both false on whatever interpretation we have chosen. then the whole sentence (*) is false.” This says that everything in the domain is F. “œxFx. for example. like this one: D: {The Pope.

You can follow these steps: 1. If the quantifier is an existential quantifier.Introductory Logic our original sentence is. It is easy to find a quantifier-free sentence that is true in a particular finite domain if and only if a given quantified sentence is true there. replace the subsentence by the conjunction of all the sentences that can be made by removing the quantifier and substituting one of the names you have chosen for the quantifier’s variable at each of its free occurrences. Decide how many items you want in your domain. you can see that our original sentence. This process is called expansion in a finite domain. Beginning with the leftmost quantifier of the given quantified sentence. We’ll expand this sentence: œx[Fx ÷ ›y(Gy & Hr)] 1. Let’s do an example. 3. replace the subsentence by the disjunction of all the sentences that can be made by removing the quantifier and substituting one of the names you have chosen for the quantifier’s variable at each of its free occurrences. 2. Select names for the items in the domain.” After we follow rule 4 above for it. “›x(Fx & œxGx)” must be false in that case as well. You should choose as many names as you have items in your intended domain. replace each subsentence beginning with a quantifier as follows: If the quantifier is a universal quantifier. 3.” The universal quantifier is expanded with a conjunction: 214 . Since the name “r” occurs in the sentence. we can use rule 5 on the subsentence beginning with “›y. things can become very unwieldy. 4. You may pick any positive integer. This procedure can be generalized. 4. but once you get beyond three. following the rules explicitly. We will use “a” for the other. The leftmost quantifier is the “œx. 5. Let’s use a domain of two elements. Include any names that occur in the sentence (or sentences) you are interested in. we must use it as one of the two names. 2.

We can chose a domain with only one member. for domains larger than three members the resulting expansions would be very cumbersome. one at a time: [Fa ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [Gr & Hr])] & [Fr ÷ ›y(Gy & Hr)] [Fa ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [Gr & Hr])] & [Fr ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [Gr & Hr])] We don’t have to choose a two-membered domain for an expansion.” “b. we get the following: Fr ÷ (Gr & Hr) If we want we can expand in a three-membered domain.Quantificational Logical Relations [Fa ÷ ›y(Gy & Hr)] & [Fr ÷ ›y(Gy & Hr)] 5. we can use a truth table to determine how to make it true or false. “œx[Fx ÷ ›y(Gr & Hr)]. for instance: Fr : T Gr: T Hr: T 215 . but obviously. you can easily find many assignments of truth values to the atomic sentences of the expansion that make the sentence true. or indeed. If we expand “œx[Fx ÷ ›y(Gy & Hr)]” in a one-membered domain. The method of expansion in finite domains gives us a way of producing quantifier-free sentences that will have the same truth values as the quantified ones on any interpretations where all the individuals in the domain are named by the names used in the expansion. consider the sentence we have been using as our example. of any positive integral number of members. Now the quanfied subsentences are expanded.” The expansion in a one membered domain we found above to be “Fr ÷ (Gr & Hr).” If you make a truth table. When a sentence has been expanded in a finite domain.” and “r:” [Fa ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [(Gb & Hr) w (Gr & Hr)])] & ([Fb ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [(Gb & Hr) w (Gr & Hr)])] & [Fr ÷ ([Ga & Hr] w [(Gb & Hr) w (Gr & Hr)])]) We could expand the sentence in a domain of four members. with members named “a. For instance.

Introductory Logic With this information. In this case. The extensions of the predicates will contain just the objects needed to make the predicates true or false. We will use a stick-figure diagram: D: FÎ: GÎ: HÎ: r: The stick figure to the left. We start by using our basic pattern for interpretations in small finite domains. Constructing an interpretation involving numbers would be equally straightforward. our domain will consist of the number 1. The stick figure to the left. according to the truth value assignment we have above. Here is the resulting interpretation: D: FÎ: GÎ: HÎ: r: {1} Î is in {1} Î is in {1} Îis in {1} 1 We can use expansion in a finite domain to find interpretations that show arguments invalid. Similarly for “G” and “H”. Next we expand each of the sentences in a domain of 216 . Î has an “F” above it. To get this diagram we start with the single stick figure. Î has a “G” above it. ›xKx. We put an “F” above the object named by “r” because we have assigned “Fr the value True. We’ll guess that only one member will be needed. Suppose we wish to show the following argument invalid: œx(Rx ÷ Kx). If we had assigned it the value False. we can easily construct an interpretation that makes the sentence (and hence the original quantified sentence) true. we would not have put the “F” there. Î has a “G” above it. ˆ ›xRx We begin by guessing how big the domain must be for the interpretation we seek.

Obviously. then for any larger domain size there will be an interpretation that also Ra: F 217 . we can make the premises true and conclusion false by making both “Ra” and “Rb” false. This illustrates an important point about L2 : If a sentence is true on an interpretation with a given sized domain. because it will make our original premises true and our original conclusion false. Ka w Kb. we could use this D: {1} KÎ: Î is in {1} RÎ: Î is in {} This interpretation will show our original argument invalid. Ka. this assignment of truth values will do: Ka: T Now we construct an interpretation: D:The stick figure to the left KÎ: Î has a “K” above it RÎ: Î has an “R” above it Alternatively. If we expand our original argument in a domain of two members. we get this: (Ra ÷ Ka) & (Rb ÷ Kb). We could also have found an interpretation with a domain of two members. ˆ Ra w Rb Obviously. and making one or both of “Ka” and “Kb” true. We get these sentences: Ra ÷ Ka. ˆ Ra We must find a way to make the conclusion false and all the premises true.Quantificational Logical Relations only one member (we’ll pick “a” as the name of the one member).

even if a finite domain is available. 8. Exercises 8-4: Expand the following sentences in a domain of one member: 1. or make the two sentences have different truth values to show non-equivalence. œx›yGxy ›y(Vy & ›wLyw) This is not difficult to prove. You must make a good guess. œx(Mx w ›yFxy) ›z[Bz ø œw(Jw ÷ Swz)] œx›y(Dxt ÷ Wxy) œv›z(Bzq & Pjv) Expand the following in a domain of three members: 9. or pairs of sentences non-equivalent by the same method. 4. This method has limitations. or try various possibilities. 3. expanding in a finite domain is not a purely mechanical method for checking arguments for validity. there are some arguments that can only be shown to be invalid by considering domains with an infinite number of members. 6.35 We can obviously show sets of sentences consistent. we make all sentences true to show consistency. There are two reasons for this. 7. First. as mentioned at the end of the previous section. The only difference is that instead of making a conclusion false and premises true. Although many aspects of expanding in finite domains are purely mechanical. there is no convenient general method other than trial and error for finding out how big it must be. 10. 218 35 .Introductory Logic makes it true. but the proof is just beyond the scope of this course. 2. œx(Fx ÷ Grx) ›y(My & Lyy) ›xFxc ø œxRcxx œx(›yGsy ÷ ›yPyx) Expand the following in a domain of two members: 5. Second.

Quantificational Logical Relations Use the method of expansion in finite domains to show that the following sets of sentences are quantificationally consistent: 11. œx(Hxx ÷ Zx). ˆ œxPx œx(›yHxy ÷ ›yHyx). ~œv(Lv ÷ Dv). 14. 20. ›yUfy Use the method of expansion in finite domains to show that the following arguments are quantificationally invalid: 15. ›xMx. ›x(Mx & Cx) œx›yWxy œx(›yQxy ÷ ›yKxy) œx›y(Oxy ø Txy) ~œx(Mx ÷ Cx) ›xœyWxy œx›y(Qxy ÷ Kxy) ›y(œxOxy ø œxTxy) 219 . ~›yœxSxy. 21. 18. ›z~Cz œx(Wx ø Rx) ›yWy. ›x(Cx ÷ Mx). ›y~My. ˆ œx›yHxy ›x(Rx & œySxy). ›w(Lw & Dw). ~›zHzz. 17. œxZx œx(Ufx ÷ Ax). 16. ˆ›x~Sxx Use the method of expansion in finite domains to show that the following pairs of sentences are not quantificationally equivalent: 19. 13. ˆ ›x(Dx & ~Lx) œx(Mx ÷ Px). ›z~Rz ›xœyHxy. 22. ~œzAz. 12.

The only method for showing arguments valid. D2. Gs Aad. or sets of sentences inconsistent in L2 is to provide an appropriate derivation or derivations. that is used to derive universally quantified sentences. ›yGgy Fa ÷ ›xGx.Introductory Logic Chapter 9: Quantificational Derivations In this chapter we shall learn a basic set of derivation rules for quantifiers. A quantified formula can have as many instances as there are names in L2 . An instance of a quantified sentence is a sentence obtained from the quantified sentence by dropping the initial quantifier and replacing each free occurrence of the quantifier’s variable with a name (the same name at all occurrences). A quantified sentence is one whose main logical operator is a quantifier. Fc ÷ ›xGx 220 . D2 contains all the rules of D1. Add Ba ÷ Ca. for L2. Abd. Because L2 has quantifiers added to it. we must first learn the concept of an instance of a quantified sentence. Gt. Bf ÷ Cf ›yGay. universal derivation. ›yGby. 1: Instances of quantified sentences The derivation rules refer to instances of quantified formulas. We will learn introduction and exploitation rules for the existential quantifier. and all of the derivation techniques for D1 apply to D2 as well. sentences equivalent. We shall also discuss strategies for completing derivations. an exploitation rule for the universal quantifier. we must add to the derivation system D1 some rules for quantifiers to get a derivation system. and a new form of derivation. He are some examples of quantified sentences with some of their instances: Sentence œxFx ›zGz œxAxd œx(Bx ÷ Cx) œx›yGxy œx(Fx ÷ ›xGx) Instances Fa. Fc Gu. Fb. In order to explain the derivations rules.

The instances of “›x[(Ax & Bx) w œy(Gx & Hy)]” are: a. œv(Jt ø [Ft w Kv]) e. (Hc & Rb) ÷ Mb 3. The instances of “œx(Fx & Gx)” are: a. Fc & Gc 2. (Ha & Rc) ÷ Ma b. The instances of “œx[(Hx & Rc) ÷ Mx]” are: a. Thus from “œxFx” we may infer “Fa” or “Fb” or “Fp” or any other instance. (Hc & Rc) ÷ Mc e. (Am & Bm) w œy(Gm & Hy) d. œv(Jn ø [Fv w Kv]) 1. The instances of “›zœv(Jz ø [Fz w Kv])” are: a. Ja ø (Fb ÷ Kb) b. tell which of the sentences are instances of the given sentence. 2: The Universal Exploitation and Existential Introduction rules. (Ar & Br) w (Gr & Hc) 4. Fa & Gb e. Fx & Gx c. Jg ø (Fg ÷ Kv) c. (Ac & Bc) w œy(Gb & Hy) c. (Hc & Rc) ÷ Mb d. The Universal Exploitation rule is simple and intuitive. This rule says that from any universally quantified sentence we can infer any of its instances. We can use the rule in this derivation: 1.Quantificational Derivations Exercises 9-1 In each of the following exercises. (Af & Bg) w œy(Gf & Hy) e. Fb & Gb b. (Ax & Bc) w œy(Gx & Hy) b. œx(Hx ÷ Mx) P 221 . œx(Fa & Gx) d. ›z(Jz ø [Fz w Ke]) d. (Hb & Rb) ÷ Mb c.

Introductory Logic 2. Hence it can only be used when the Universal Quantifier is the main logical operator of the sentence. Fido barks. 4. SHOW Ms +))))))))))))))). If everyone (or everything) has some property. 4. To do this. We can use Universal Exploitation to infer any of the following from “œx(Fx & Ga):” Fb & Ga Fa & Ga Fm & Ga Note that Universal Exploitation is a rule of inference. œE 2. *Ms * . then surely my car has one. Thus from “Fa” 222 . Socrates is human. then surely if Fido is a dog. If every dog barks. Existential Introduction allows us to infer an existentially quantified sentence from any one of its instances. If every car has a battery. We’ll use the notation N[< > 0] to stand for the result of replacing all free occurrences of < in N by 0. Hs 3.” The Universal Exploitation rule corresponds to our ordinary ways of reasoning. ÷E This derivation corresponds to the well-know argument. “All humans are mortal. We will use a Greek letter “<” to stand for variables of L2.)))))))))))))))- P DD 1. That means that Universal Exploitation cannot be used to derive anything from any of the following: ~œxMx ›yœz(Kx & Gz) œzPz ÷ œyHy Fg & œxPx We can represent the Universal Exploitation rule with a diagram in our usual fashion. *Hs ÷ Ms * 5. therefore Socrates is mortal. Then we can diagram Universal Exploitation thus: œE œ<N ))))))) N[< > 0] Existential Introduction is also a simple and intuitive rule. and the Greek letter “0” to stand for names of L2. we’ll need to explain some notation. then surely anyone (or anything) we name has it.

that is. ›I The Existential Introduction rule corresponds to our ordinary ways of thinking. we know that some star is four light years from earth. If we know that Alonzo is a logic student. 3. We can use Existential Introduction to infer any of the following from “Ga & Wb:” ›x(Ga & Wx) ›y(Gy & Wb) ›z(Ga & Wb) These are all correct because “Ga & Wb” is an instance of each of those sentences. Existential Introduction is a rule of inference.Quantificational Derivations we may infer “›xFx” or “›yFy” or “›zFz. Whenever it is used the existential quantifier that is introduced must have scope over the whole sentence. the diagram looks like this: ›I N[< > 0] ))))))))) ›< N Exercises 9-2 223 . Like Universal Exploitation.*Lb & Mg * 4. We can use the rule in this derivation: 1. So none of the following can be inferred by Existential Introduction: ~›xFx ›yBy ÷ ›yMy Vx›y(Hx & Ty) We can represent the Existential Introduction rule with a diagram in our usual fashion. you can get “Ga & Wb” from each of those sentences by dropping the initial quantifier and replacing the variable by the appropriate name. œx(Lx & Mg) 2.*›x(Lb & Mx) * .” for instance. Using the notational conventions we used above for Universal Exploitation. If we know that Alpha Centuri is a star that is four light years from earth.)))))))))))))P DD 1. œE 3. then we can infer that someone is a logic student. SHOW ›x(Lb & Gx) +))))))))))))).

2. 7. then we could complete the derivation thus: 1. Cc. *Mc ÷ Jc * 8. ˆ ›zGz Fg & (›yGy ÷ Hg). 9. we would like to be able to infer that someone should go to jail. 8. ˆ Fb œx(~Mx ø Lxa). We would like to make inferences from existentially quantified sentences. ˆ ›zDz 3: Existential Exploitation The instances of an existentially quantified sentence don’t follow from it. œxœy[Nx ÷ (Kx & My)]. For instance. œx(Mx ÷ Jx) 2. *Jc * 9. œE 5. ˆ ›vBv œxœy[(Jx & Ky) ÷ (My & Nx)]. ˆ ›y(Mb & Ny) œx[›y(Oy & Px) ÷ Hx]. 5.)))))))))224 P P DD ??????? 1. ~(Pq ÷ Mg). œx(Lxx ÷ Px). A derivation to show that this follows would start like this (using the obvious interpretation): 1. ˆ ~Ma ÷ Pa Fa & Ga. 6. SHOW ›zJz P P But how shall we continue the derivation? If we somehow could take it for granted that Colonel Mustard was the murderer in question. SHOW ›zJz +))))))))). œx~Gx. 4. ~(Lo w Si). *›zJz * . Np. Ja & Kb. Ot & Pt. *Mc * 7. ›xMx 3. 6. 4. Gr. œx(Fx w Gx). œx(Mx ÷ Jx) 2. ˆ Gm œw(Cw ÷ Dw).Introductory Logic Provide derivations using the new rules that show the following arguments valid: 1. 3. ›xMx 3. from the premise that all murderers should go to jail and the premise that someone is a murderer. ˆ ›zHz ›x(Kx & Mx) ÷ œyGy. ˆ ›xMx ~(Bo ø Si). ˆ ›z(Fz & Hz) ›xMx w ~›yPy. ÷E 7. 10. ›I .

the murderer might well have been Ms. or that Professor Plum was the murderer. but it is simple. If all we know is that someone is a murderer. Scarlet. we can guarantee that we don’t get into trouble by imposing a restriction on the names we use: we may not use a name that has appeared already in the derivation. A less restrictive condition would be more complicated. provided the name we introduce does not appear on any earlier line of the derivation. The rule allows us to infer an instance from an existentially quantified sentence. is in order. This observation suggests a way we might safely carry out the derivation: simply assume that we can name the unknown individual with a particular name. the same conclusion could have been derived if we had assumed that Ms. Scarlet was the murderer.36 A careful statement of the rule we have been discussing. the name also must not occur in lines containing uncanceled SHOW. the Existential Exploitation rule. or even that the President was the murderer. without restriction. The Existential Exploitation rule is very different from any of the rules we have discussed before. Note that the reference to earlier lines of the derivation here is not limited to accessible lines. and very different from the Existential Introduction and Universal exploitation rules.Quantificational Derivations But. this procedure might lead to trouble if it were not used carefully: we mustn’t assume that the individual is someone about whom we are trying to prove something. or Professor Plum instead. In particu- lar. If you look back at the derivation. Fortunately. and existentially This condition is more restrictive than necessary. of course. we can’t simply assume that Colonel Mustard was the murderer. Existential Introduction and Universal Exploitation can be used whenever we want. The instances of an existentially quantified sentence don’t follow logically from it. Even though the instances of an existentially quantified sentence don’t follow from it. we are not entitled to conclude that anyone in particular is. and we mustn’t assume that the individual is someone about whom we already know something that we don’t know about everyone. and proceed with the derivation! Obviously. 225 36 . because instances follow from a universally quantified sentence. you will see that it doesn’t matter which name we used. we can still sometimes pretend that they do.

when we use the Existential Exploitation rule we are inferring lines that do not follow from earlier lines. If we wanted to reason about murderers. as above. let’s all that person “Clive. Since the instances of an existentially quantified sentence are not logical consequences of it. In fact. The restriction on the use of Existential Exploitation can lead 226 .” So Clive is a murderer. By our first premise. he should go to jail. And since Clive should go to jail. the lines are really assumptions. It can only be used when the existential quantifier is the main logical operator of the sentence. But we can allow ourselves to infer lines using Existential Exploitation without fear that we will reach conclusions (canceled SHOW lines) that do not follow from premises. Introductory Logic quantified sentences follow from their instances. we might start out like this: “Someone is a murderer. provided we observe the The Existential Exploitation rule seems to correspond with some ordinary ways of thinking. Existential exploitation. Someone is a murderer. like all the rules of this chapter. is a rule of inference. For convenience. using the notation we have introduced earlier in this chapter: ›E ›<N ))))))) N[< > 0] provided that 0 is new to the derivation Note that we include the restriction with the diagram to emphasize its importance. if Clive is a murderer.’” An informal version of the derivation we gave above might go like this: All murderers should go to jail. and in a more formal treatment would be treated as such. Thus it cannot be used to infer anything from any of these sentences: ~›xFx ›xFx ÷ œyGy œx›yJxy Fb w ›xTx We can represent the Existential Exploitation rule in a diagram. for convenience let’s call him ‘Clive. So he should go to jail. someone should go to jail.restriction that the name chosen in a use of Existential Exploitation does not appear on any earlier line of the derivation.

1. The remedy is simple: one must reverse the order of lines 4 and 5.*›xDx * . œx(Ax ÷ Bx).” Unfortunately.*Ma v Da * 5. If “~Ma” is derived first. Often you want to get the same name as a result of Existential Exploitation and Universal Exploitation.*~Ma * 6. One common error can be seen here: 1.Quantificational Derivations to troubles in derivations. ›E <<< WRONG!! 4. SHOW ›xDx +))))))))))))). 5. 5. ˆ œxFx ÷ Ga ›xMx w ›xLx. ›E The use of Existential Exploitation in line 5 is incorrect: “a” already appears in the derivation (on line 4). ˆ Ma & ›zSz ›x(Fx & Gx). ˆ ›zBz ›x›y(Rx & Sy). a new name must be chosen.” it cannot be used with line 4 to infer “Da” on line 6. 2. so that the results can be used together with sentential rules to derive something. though the rule is easy to forget. Since there is no restriction on the use of Universal Exploitation. use ›E before œE. 3. 6. The reason for this rule is simple. such as “b. ›x~Mx 3. œx(Mx w Dx) 2. 4. wE 6. œE 2. ˆ ›xFx & ›xGx ›x(Fx ÷ Ga). it can be used to get “Ma v Da” any time in the derivation. This example illustrates the following rule of thumb: When possible. œxœy[(Gx & Fy) ÷ (Mx & Sy)]. 4.*Da * 7. Unless Existential Exploitation is used first.)))))))))))))P P DD 1. Exercises 9-3 Provide derivations showing the following arguments valid. the restriction on the use of Existential Exploitation is not violated. ˆ ›x(Mx w Lx) 227 . To use Existential Exploitation. ›yAy. if the sentence on line 5 is “~Mb. the restriction on its use will prevent using the same name that is used in Universal Exploitation. ˆ ›y›x(Rx & Sy) ›y(Ga & Fy).

but it does not follow that everyone does. since no name appears earlier in the derivation. we show an arbirary instance of it. ›x(Fa & Mx). we show that an arbitrary instance of it is true. In this context. ˆ ›zBz 12. we prove that this is true of an arbitrary triangle. In D2. there is a method of deriving universally quantified statements. 6. SHOW œx~Kx +))))))))))))). We call this sort of derivation Universal Derivation (UD). 10. rather. œx(›yBxy ÷ ›yLyx).**~Qa * * 7. except what is true of everything.Introductory Logic 7. MT We chose the letter “a” for the name that replaced the “x” in “~Kx.” but we could have chosen any names. an arbitrary instance is one about which we assume nothing. Universally quantified statements do not follow from their instances. ˆ ›xTx ÷ œyLy 11. * 5. ˆ ~œx~Qx 9. but it doesn’t follow that every car is. œx(Tx ÷ œyLy). œx~Qx 3. ›x~Dx. ˆ ›x›yLyx 4: Universal Derivation There is no Universal Introduction rule. œE 2. œxœy[(Fx & My) ÷ ›wBw].**Ka ÷ Qa * * 6. œx(Kx ÷ Qx) 2. ›zMz. œxPx. Gertrude likes rap. to show that the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal to a straight angle.**~Ka * * *.*SHOW ~Ka * *+))))))))). Here is a sample derivation using it: 1. œE 5. we have a derivation rule that provides for such derivations. to which we give an arbitrary name. ˆ ›x(Dx ÷ œyDy) 8. ˆ ~›x~Px ›xQx. Here’s another sample 228 . My car is gray.* . œxœy[(Mx & My) ÷ Bxy].)))))))))))))P P UD DD 1. To show that a universally quantified statement is true. For instance. where an arbitrary instance is one where the name that replaces the variable is new to the derivation. It says that to show a universally quantified sentence. 4.))))))))).

**œy[(Db & Cy ÷ ~(Lb & My)] * * 7. using a name that is new to the derivation. We chose “b” instead. we could equally well have chosen “q. SHOW œx[(Lx & Mg) ÷ ~(Lx & Ma)] +)))))))))))))))))))))))))))). œE 2.so whenever you find a SHOW followed by a universally quantified statement. * 5. *SHOW N[< > 0] * *+))))))). œx[(Lx & Mg) ÷ (Dx & Ca)] 2. HS Notice that in this derivation we could not choose “a” or “g” as a name for the arbitrary individual in line 4.))))))))))))))- provided 0 is new to the derivation not optional and must immediately follow the line where Universal derivation is used. œE 5. just as we diagram the other derivations rules (DD.**(Db & Ca) ÷ ~(Lb & Ma) * * 8. 4.Quantificational Derivations derivation: 1.7. œxœy[(Dx & My) ÷ ~(Lx & My)] 3.* .)))))))))))))))))))))))). 229 . the next line should be a SHOW followed by an instance of the statement on the line above.” or any other name but “a” and “g. we almost always When using Universal Derivation.*SHOW (Lb & Mg) ÷ ~(Lb & Ma) * *+)))))))))))))))))))))))). * ** * * ** * * ** * * *. and CD): UD SHOW œ<N +)))))))))))))). œE 6. As a general rule.**(Lb & Mg) ÷ ~(Lb & Ma) * * *.))))))))))))))))))))))))))))P P UD DD 1.” We can diagram the pattern of Universal Derivation.**(Lb & Mg) ÷ (Db & Ca) * * 6. Both of those names already occur earlier in the derivation. the second SHOW line is use universal derivation to show statements that begin with a universal quantifier.)))))))* . ID.” or “j.

Using rules incorrectly may result in the derivation of falsehoods from truths. 6. a quantifier that is the initial symbol of a sentence need not be the 230 . The three quantifier rules (and Universal Derivation) can only be used when the relevant quantifier is the main logical operator of the sentence. ›xGx ÷ œx(Gx ÷ Hx). 1. 10. ˆ œx[œy(Ny ÷ Dxy) ÷ Dxs] ›xFx ÷ Ga. œy(Py ÷ Gy). Remember. You must use ›E first. You cannot do this either: 9. œE The universal quantifier is not the main logical operator of line 9. 3. œx(~Dx ÷ ~Rx). 10. œE The universal quantifier (“œy”) is not the main logical operator of line 6 in the example above. ˆ œx(Fx ÷ Gx) œx(~Px w Rx). ˆ œx(Fx ÷ Ga) œz(Hz ÷ Fz). ›x(Gx & Ha) WRONG!! 6. ˆ œx(Ax ÷ Cx) œxFx & œyGy. 11. 7. 2. ˆ œx(Gx ÷ Fx) œxœy(Fx ø Gy). 5. ˆ œx(Fx & Gx) œx(Fx ø Gx). the existential quantifier (“›x”) is. ˆ œx(Px ÷ Fx) œx~Fx. ˆ œx(Wx w Rx) ›xPx ÷ œyQy. ˆ œxœy[Pa ÷ (Qx & Ly)] 5: Using Rules Correctly The quantification rules are not difficult. ›xœy(Gx & Hy) 7. Hence you cannot use œE on line 6.Introductory Logic Exercises 9-4 Provide derivations showing the following arguments valid. ›x~Gx. ›x~Rx ÷ ›xWx. ˆ œx~Gx ›xFx ÷ œyGy. 4. even though it comes at the beginning of the line. The main logical operator of line 9 is the wedge (“w”). ˆ œx(Px ÷ Dx) Ns. 8. but they must be used correctly. œx(Bx ÷ Cx). œxRx w ›xKx Ra w ›xKx WRONG!! 9. 12. œx(Ax ÷ Bx). So you cannot do this: 6. ˆ œxœy(Fx ÷ Gy) ›xWx ÷ œxRx. 9. ~œxLx ÷ ~Qb.

Thus you cannot do this: 4. 6. **›x(Fx & Ha) * * 8. just as a tilde which is the initial symbol in a sentence need not be the main logical operator of that sentence (as. œxGx P 3.* . œE 7. This sentence cannot be derived by Universal Derivation. * 5. SHOW ›zHz 4. ›E <<< WRONG!! because “a” already occurs in the derivation before line 5. ›E because the “a” already occurs in the derivation before line 5. but the remedy is not always so easy. The official sentence corresponding to “œxRx w ›xKx” is “(œxRx w ›xKx). for example. SHOW ›xœy(Fx & Hy) UD <<< WRONG!! +)))))))))))))))))))))))). Ma P P 1. **Gb * * 2.)))))))))))))))))))).” This point applies to UD as well as to the other rules. no matter how inconvenient they seem.))))))))))))))))))))))))The use of UD at line 3 is wrong. And this partial derivation is wrong: 1. Ga & Ka WRONG!! 4. *SHOW ›x(Fx & Ha) * DD *+)))))))))))))))))))). œx[Ga ÷ œy(Fx & Hy)] P 2.Quantificational Derivations main logical operator of that sentence. ›yMy 3. **Fb & Ha * * 7. 4. œE 9. because the universal quantifier is not the main operator of “›xœyFxy” on line 3. ›I *. œx(Mx ÷ Hx) 2. œE 2. œE 6. the derivation can be fixed by putting line 5 before line 4. **œy(Fb & Hy) * * 5. The restrictions on the ›E and UD rules must be followed scrupulously. So this derivation is incorrect: 1. You can see clearly that this is so by restoring the parentheses that our informal conventions allow us to drop. Ma ÷ Ha 5. in “~S w T”). ÷E 8. ›x(Ga & Kx) 5. The requirement for a new name applies even when the 231 . **Gb ÷ œy(Fb & Hy) * * 1. In this case.

SHOW œxFx +)))))))))))). œE 2. SHOW Fa DD +)))))))))). Fa 2. 3.*Fa * 1. 4.))))))))))- <<<< WRONG!! There is no way to fix this derivation. 5. ›xFx P 2. before line 3. **Fa * * *. making this bogus derivation wrong: 1.Introductory Logic previous occurrence of the name is in an uncanceled SHOW line.))))))))))))P UD <<<< WRONG!! DD 1. 3. we cannot conclude that any particular thing is F just because something is. 1. Sometimes the best way to do this will involve an entirely different strategy than that used in the erroneous derivation. 1.* . ›E . ›E 4. *Fa ÷ Fb * 6.)))))))). The UD rule is used incorrectly here. * 4. as in this bogus derivation: 1. R We surely cannot conclude that everything is is F just because one particular thing is. ÷E . so the use of UD is incorrect. Exercises 9-5 Each of the following derivations contains several errors. *SHOW Fa * *+)))))))). SHOW Fb +)))))))))))). The same restriction applies to the UD rule. Fa 3. *Fb * .))))))))))))232 P P DD 1. *Fa ÷ œxFx * 5. ›xFx ÷ œxFx 2. The “a” occurs already in the derivation. Then try to redo the derivations correctly. Find ALL the errors in them.

*Ha & Fa * 7.*Ha * 11. ›E 6. œE 2. œE 7. !I 4. 7. &E 8. *Fa & Ga * 4. 9. ÷E 9.**Ra & Sa * * 12. 1. ›yœx(Fx & Gy) P 3.** ! * * *. ›E 6. MT 10. œE 7.**œy(Ra & Sy) * * 11.))))))))))))))))). ÷E 8.** ~Sa * * 15. &E 12. *›y(Hy & Fa) * 6. &E 4.*Ha & ~Gb * 12. * 7.))))))))))))))))))P P DD 1. ›I 8. œx[›y(Fx & Gy) ÷ ›z(Hx & Gz)] P 2. ›I P P ID 2. ›yœx(Hy & Fx) 3. DeM 13. 7. SHOW ~›x(Rx & ~Px) +))))))))))))))))))))). *~(Sa w Ta) * * 5. * SHOW ! * *+))))))))))))))))). * ›x(Rx & ~Px) 6. ** Ra & ~Pa * * 8. ›E AID DD 5. 1. 4. *~›yGy * 9. &E 9. **~œy(Ra & Sy) ÷ Pa * * 9. œx[(Fx & Ga) ÷ Hx] 2.)))))))))))))))))))))5. 4. 1. *Fa * 8. œx[~œy(Rx & Sy) ÷ Px] 2. *Fa ÷ ~›yGy * 5.Quantificational Derivations 2. &E 4. ›I 12. 1.* .**Sa * * 13. 10. ›E 1.))))))))))))))))))))))))3. œxFx ÷ ~›yGy 2. œE 5. *›y(Fa & Gy) * 2. **~Pa * * 10. ›I . œE 11. &I 11.*›x(Hx & ~Gb) * 13 *›x›y(Hx & ~Gy) * .**~Sa & ~Ta * * 14. ›E 6. ~›z(Sz w Tz) 3. *~Gb * 10. œx(Fx & Ga) P P 233 . *›y(Fa & Gy) ÷ ›z(Ha & Gz) * 1. œE 5. 14. 4. SHOW ›z›y(Hy w Gz) DD +)))))))))))))))))))))))). SHOW ›x›y(Hx & ~Gy) +)))))))))))))))))). *›y(Fa & Gy) * 5. *›z›y(Hy w Gz) * 8. *›z(Ha & Gz) * 6.

* SHOW Ha * *+)))))))))))))))). since real skill is not a matter of following mechanical rules. ** Fa * * 9. ›x(Cx w Ox) 2. &I 7. Ca w Oa P 1. ** Fa & Ga * * 10. All the strategy suggestions of D1 apply as well to D2.. SHOW Oa ÷ (›xCx w ›xOx) 234 . Note: in this section. Any strategy suggestions are best thought of as rules of thumb only. . 8. and finish those that are not completed. &E 1. and mastery of the rules. 9. 3. ›E Thinking over the various strategies we used for derivations in D1. but all the suggestions there apply to D2 as well as to D1. ›E SHOW Ca ÷ (›xCx w ›xOx) ?. you may find it useful to work the derivations along with the text. ** œxFx * * 6. so we try to establish the necessary statements: 1.. But the strategy suggestions provide a good place to start. persistence. SHOW ›xCx w ›xOx 3. * 5. Only experience and practice can develop skill. 4. 4. guides to what is often the best way to find a derivation. SHOW œxHx +)))))))))))))))))))). &E 2. We will not repeat here the discussion of D1 strategy we gave in Section 4 of Chapter 5. For instance. ›x(Cx w Ox) P SHOW ›xCx w ›xOx Ca w Oa 1. œE 5. **Ga * * 7. 2. ** Ha * * *.* .Introductory Logic 3. ÷E 6: Strategy in Quantificational Derivations Constructing derivations requires ingenuity. it may occur to us that Separation of Cases might work here. œE 6. ** (Fa & Ga) ÷ Ha * * 8.))))))))))))))))))))- UD DD 2. suppose we must complete this derivation: 1.)))))))))))))))).

We discover which names to use in this case by looking ahead to the conclusion. SHOW Ha & Rb +)))))))))))))))))). In the following simple derivation. it often pays to work simultaneously back from the end of the derivation and forward from the premises. we merely use our quantifier exploitation rules to eliminate the quantifiers. œxœy[(Nx & My) ÷ (Sy & Tx)] 2. 5.” Many derivations are done by taking instances of quantified sentences and using the D1 rules to complete the derivations. we may easily complete this derivation: 1. it seems likely that we will use the name “a” to replace the variable “x” when we use Universal Exploitation of line 1. Since “a” occurs in “Ha” in the conclusion. consider this derivation: 1. *Hab * . such as “›x›y(Hx & Ry)” or even “œxœy(Hx & Ry). Then we use the same name in Universal Exploitation on line 2. In such cases. and then to use Separation of Cases to get “›xCx v ›xOx. ÷E 6. Once you have understood this derivation. *Wa * 6. and work backwards to see which 235 . *Wa ÷ œy(Ha & Ry) * 5. *œy(Ha & Ry) * 7.))))))))))))))))))P P DD 1. then the remaining steps are often mostly applications of D1 rules. For instance. 4.) Sometimes it is necessary to look ahead in order to figure out which names to use. œE In such derivations it is important to use the same name for successive uses of Universal Exploitation. so that the lines we get from the two uses (lines 4 and 5) can be used together with D1 rules.Quantificational Derivations Now it is relatively easy to complete each of these sub-derivations using Conditional Derivation. you should be able to recognize how to derive other conclusions from the same premises. SHOW Sd & Tg P P Here it would be a good idea to figure out what steps are likely to lead to the conclusion. œxWx 3. For instance. œxœy(Nx & My) 3. œE 4. œE 2.” (Try to construct such derivations. œx[Wx ÷ œy(Hx & Ry)] 2.

you may want to start out your derivation by using Existential Exploitation to eliminate these. œE 1. œE 4. œE 6. œxœy[(Nx & My) ÷ (Sy & Tx)] 2. œx[Kx ÷ (Mx & Tb)] 3. 7. SHOW Sd & Tg +)))))))))))))))))))))))). because we don’t know yet which line numbers the will actually get. For instance. if you have several premises whose main operators are existential quantifiers. ? Ng & Md (We use question marks for the line numbers here.. *Ng & Md * 6. SHOW ›x›y(Lx & My) P P The first step is to get rid of both the existential quantifiers in the first line 4. As a corollary of this rule. *Sd & Tg * .) Now it is easy to see how the whole derivation should be completed: 1. it cannot be used in an Existential Exploitation inference. Remember that once a name has appeared in a derivation. œxœy(Nx & My) 3. ›E .. It seems like a good guess that the conclusion will be reached from a sentence like this: . *œy(Ng & My) * 5. (Ng & Md) ÷ (Sd & Tg) and one like this: ..Introductory Logic names need to be used at each stage. So if you need to get the same name from a use of Universal Exploitation and a use of Existential Exploitation..))))))))))))))))))))))))P P DD 2. ›x›y(Kx & Ly) 2. ?. you must use Existential Exploitation first. *œy[(Ng & My) ÷ (Sy & Tg)] * 7. ›y(Ka & Ly) 236 1. 4. ÷E We must always remember to use Existential Exploitation before Universal Exploitation whenever possible. consider this derivation: 1. œE 5. *(Ng & Md) ÷ (Sd &Tg) * 8.

Tb 10. 7. 237 . but you need to introduce it to the derivation before any other names are introduced. Since the name you pick for the instance needs to be new to the derivation. (Finish it. Ma & Tb 9. Now the derivation is practically finished. Line 5 provides a target for the use of Universal Exploitation on line 2: 6.Quantificational Derivations 5. SHOW Qa 5. it doesn’t matter what it is. &E Now the derivation is easy to finish. ›E From this beginning the rest of the derivation is straightforward. first start the universal derivation and then eliminate the existential quantifiers. because it already appears in the derivation. SHOW œxQx 4. &E 8. œE 5. Ka 8. œx[›zAz ÷ (œzQz & Rx)] 3. but without the proper start. provide a derivation showing the argument valid. as in this derivation: 1. (Finish it. it would be very difficult. ÷E 8. Ka ÷ (Ma & Tb) 7. Line 5 now gives us a target for the Universal Exploitation we will use on line 2. we could not have chosen “b” as the name to introduce. 7. Ma 2. ›zAz ÷ (œzQz & Rc) ›zAz 2. ›I We figure out that line 7 is needed by comparing line 6 and line 5.) To SHOW a universally quantified sentence. ›E Note that at line 5. ›xAx 2. Ka & Lc 4. If you have both existentially quantified premises and a SHOW line that is universally quantified. 6. bearing in mind the desire to use ÷E on line 6. start a universal derivation by trying to SHOW an instance. Ab P P 1.) Exercises 9-6 For each of the following. œE 5 &E 6.

œE 6. Now we must use Universal exploitation on line 2. 9. 7. SHOW œx›ySxy 4. ›x›yBxy 2. ›yAy ÷ œz(Hz ÷ Az). Now the derivation is practically finished. 2.Introductory Logic 1. ›yBby 6. ˆ ›xEx ø ›x(Ex & Nx) œxœy(Fx ÷ ~Gy). and we noticed that we could then get that antecedent from line 6. (Finish it. Aa ÷›y(Cy & Dy). Bbc P P 1. 3. this derivation: 1. ›I We chose the name used in line 7 to make the antecedent as much like line 6 as possible. ›E Here we have simply followed the rules to show a universally quantified sentence by universal derivation. 5. 8. ~œxBx ÷ ~›xPx ˆ ›xJx ˆ ~›xLx ø œx~Lx ˆ ~ œxSx ø ›x~Sx 7: Derivations with Polyadic Predicates Derivations with polyadic predicates do not require any different rules or strategies from derivations with monadic predicates. 4. ˆ ›yDy œx(Ex ÷ Nx). and to use Existential Exploitation before Universal Exploitation. ›zBbz ÷ œzSzb 8. ›x(Bx & Zx) & ›x(Bx & ~Zx). 10. ›xAx. for instance. ˆ ~›x(Fx & Gx) ˆ ›x(›xMx ÷ Mx) [Hint: Find a way to use SC2] œx›y(Dx ø Fy). œx(›zBxz ÷ œzSzx) 3. Consider. thus: 7. 6.) We can easily derive “ œx›yFxy” from “›yœxFxy. ˆ œxFx ÷ œyDy œx(Kx ÷ Zx). ›E 5.” thus: 238 . ›x(Rx w Wx). Ha. ›zBbz 2. ˆ ~œx(Bx ÷ Kx) œxœy(Rx ø Wy). Ba & Pa. SHOW ›ySay 5. ˆ œzRz œxBx ÷ ›xJx. although the derivations can be somewhat more complicated.

)))))))))))))))P UD DD 1. The corresponding argument is not valid. because you will have made a mistake. SHOW Lab Now we get rid of the existential quantifiers in the second premise choosing names that are new to the derivation: 6. SHOW œx›yFxy +))))))))))))))). ›I But we cannot derive “›yœxFxy” from “ œx›yFxy” because the restrictions on names in our rules will prevent the derivation from being completed. we interpret it to mean that every person loves every lover. œE 5. 239 . We will end this section on strategy by working through an amusing but complicated derivation. but we still have a SHOW line containing a universally quantified sentence. **œxFxb * * 5.* .))))))))))). 3. ›yœxFxy 2. Suppose we are given the premises “Everyone loves a lover37” and “Someone loves someone” and asked to derive “Everyone loves everyone. œx(›yLxy ÷ œzLzx) 2. So we start another universal derivation: 5. * SHOW ›yFay * *+))))))))))).Quantificational Derivations 1. and hence our rules must not permit the derivation. ›E 4. * 4. ›x›yLxy 3. 37 ›yLcy 2. SHOW œyLay P P We have started one universal derivation. You will find it instructive to try to construct such a derivation. we begin this way: 1. ›E Note that this sentence is ambiguous. as you can easily show. SHOW œxœyLxy 4. **Fab * * 6. check your derivation carefully. **›yFay * * *. In working through it.” Using an obvious interpretation. we will try to reproduce the trial and error that one usually uses to discover derivations. If you think you have done it.

If we had looked forward to the end of the derivation and then worked backwards. and since “b” already appeared. so we try this: 10. ÷E Now what shall we do? Remember that we are trying to get to “Lab. ÷E This is very close to what we want! We could do this as the next line: 240 . a is a lover. 9. Let’s try that and see what happens. it never hurts to have an unnecessary line.Introductory Logic 7. 13. œE At this point. and we haven’t gotten the result we are aiming for.” But a little inspection shows that we could not have. 12. So perhaps we should look at some other ways to go on from here. we had to use a new name. ›I 1. That “c” was introduced by Existential Exploitation in line 6. the antecedent of line 8 matches line 6. but we will go on with it to see how to recover. ›yLcy ÷ œzLzc 1. so we proceed. 11. 8. œzLzc 6. 8. However. œE (Perhaps you have already noticed that this will not work. 12. œE 11. ›E Now we try to see how to connect what we have with the first premise. Using the name “c” with Universal Exploitation seems promising.” Perhaps the right move here is to get as close as we can. we realize that line 7 was unnecessary. Lac 9. it needed to be new to the derivation then. and hence we can use the first premise again. Lcd 6. ›yLay ›yLay ÷ œzLza œzLza 10. we might have avoided this poor strategy. One thing to do is to go back and look at previous steps to see whether we could have chosen differently so that we could have a “b” here where we have a “c. One thing is possible: since a loves c.) What do we do next? We have used both premises.

10. ÷E 13. 3. and we are done. 13. ˆ œx(Ix ÷ Wxx) ˆ ›xœyFxy ÷ œy›xFxy œxœy(Lxy ÷Lyx). 12. œx(›yLxy ÷ Hx).” but we have “Lba” instead. ›I 1. œE Now we only need to box and cancel three times. œy(Fya ÷ Py). 9.” we can complete the derivation with the original lines 4 and 5: 10. 4. rather than “a. 1. 8. ˆ œxBxx 241 . 2. ˆ œx›yQxy œxœy(Bxy w Byx). ˆ œxHx œxœy(Pxay ÷ Qxy). First. SHOW œyLby SHOW Lba A quick check of the rules will show that these lines are just as good as the lines we started with. œx[(Gx & Vxx) ÷ Wxx]. If we choose “b” there. ›yLby ›yLby ÷ œzLzb œzLzb Lab Lbc 9. Exercises 9-7 Provide derivations showing the following arguments valid. œxœy[Fxy ÷ (Gx w Hy)]. œE 10. Fab. 7. 11. 5. ˆ ›x›yPxy œx(Ix ÷ Gx). there are two ways to fix the derivation. ˆ œxIxx œxœy(Rxy w Ryx).Quantificational Derivations 14. 11. Another way to fix the derivation is to go back to line 10 and make a different decision.” This would only require changing two lines: 4. 6. Let’s look back at the derivation and see whether there is anything we could have done differently that would get around this problem. ˆ Gr œxœy(Fxy ÷ Fyx). œE 11. we could easily have arranged things so that our target was “Lba” instead of “Lab. and yet so far! We want “Lab. Lba 13. In fact. ˆ œxœy(Lxy ø Lyx) œxœy(Wxy ÷ Ixx). ˆ Pb ›x›y(Pxy w Pyx). 14. 5. 12. ˆ œxRxx œx(Lxa w Lxb). œx›yWxy. Frs & ~Hs. œxœyPxyb. œE So near. œyVyy.

›xSx ˆ œx(Wx ÷ ~Tx) ˆ œx›y(Rxy ø Rxx) œx›yMxy.Introductory Logic 12. ›xMxa ÷ ~›xMax. 16. œx[Sx ÷ œy(Ty ÷ ~Axy)]. œx~Gxx. 14. ˆ œxœy(Gxy ÷ 242 . 13. œxœy(Cxy ÷ Cyx). ˆ ›xœy~Myx œxœyœz[(Gxy & Gyz) ÷ Gxz]. ˆ œx(~Cxx ÷ œy~Cxy) œx[Sx ÷ œy(Wy ÷ Axy)]. ~Gyx) œxœyœz[(Cxy & Cyz) ÷ Cxz]. 15.

the “SHOW” line may be canceled and subsequent lines boxed.) 243 . an instance of it may appear on a line.) Quantificational Structural Rule Existential Exploitation: If ›<N appears on an earlier Universal Derivation Rule: If an uncanceled “SHOW” line is of the form œ<N. provided the instantiating name has not occurred already in the derivation. In this case. even in an inaccessible line. 0 is called the instantiating name.Quantificational Derivations New Derivation Rules In Chapter 9: Instances: If N = œ<R or N = ›<R is a sentence of L2. (Annotation: UD appears on the canceled show line. (Annotation: the number of the earlier line plus œE. and the instantiating name does not appear in the derivation on the uncanceled “SHOW” line or earlier in the derivation. ›<N may appear on a line. 0. (Annotation: the number of the earlier line plus ›I. Basic Quantificational Rules of Inference Universal Exploitation Rule: If œ<N appears on an earlier accessible line of a derivation. then an instance of N is R with all free occurrences of < replaced by any name. and immediately after it a canceled “SHOW” line appears on which there is an instance of the sentence on the preceding “SHOW” line. even in an inaccessible line.) accessible line of a derivation. (Annotation: the number of the earlier line plus ›E. any instance of it may appear on a line.) Existential Introduction rule: If an instance of ›<N appears on an earlier accessible line of a derivation.

However. the rules of Chapter 9 give us no way to derive something from premises that are negations of quantified sentences. *SHOW ›xFx * *+))))))))))))))))))))))). ~›x~Hx. 4. SHOW ›x(Fx & Hx) +))))))))))))))))))))))))))). **SHOW ! * * **+))))))))))))))))))). this argument. For instance. the premises are negated quantifications. * * * * 244 P P DD ID AID DD UD CD .Introductory Logic Chapter 10: More Quantificational Derivations In this chapter we will learn equivalence rules involving quantifiers that make derivations easier. 1: Quantifier Negation The quantifier rules of Chapter 9 are complete. for instance. ~œx(Fx ÷ Gx). with sufficient ingenuity. in the sense that if an argument of L2 is quantificationally valid. ~œx(Fx ÷ Gx) 2. * * * 8. for instance. * * 7. there is a correct derivation employing only the rules of Chapter 9 that has only the premises (if any) of the argument as its premises and the conclusion of the argument as the first sentence on a SHOW line. this one: 1. Consider. except indirect derivation. ˆ ›x(Fx & Hx) It is not obvious how to find a derivation that shows this argument quantificationally valid. ***SHOW œx(Fx ÷ Gx) * * * ***+))))))))))))))). we simply get another negated quantification. **~›xFx * * 6. A derivation can be found. the rules of Chapter 9 make some derivations complex and difficult to discover. and if we try do do an indirect derivation. We shall also discuss strategy for derivations and learn about enthymemes. This can make some derivations complicated. ****SHOW Fa ÷ Ga * * * * ****+))))))))))). ~›x~Hx 3. arguments with missing premises. * 5.

7. *****Fa * * * * * 10. ******~Ga * * * * * * 12.))))))))))))))))))))))* 16. Here are their diagrams: QN ~œ<N :: ›<~N ~›<N :: œ<~N The rules tell us that we can replace a sentence that is a negated quantification by the sentence we get by putting the negation sign 245 . ›I To make it easier to find derivations showing arguments like this one quantificationally valid. *›x(Fx & Hx) * . *******›xFx ** * * * * * 14.* * * * 15.))))))). ***! * * * **. ******SHOW ! * * * * * * ******+))))). * * 20. These new rules do not enable us to find derivations for any arguments for which there are not already derivations using merely the rules of Chapter 9. !I 1. *SHOW Hb * *+)))))))))))))))))))))). !I 16.* * *.)))))))))))))). ›E ID AID DD 18. quantifier negation. &I 22. ›I 5. *Fb * 17. ***›x~Hx * * * 21. **SHOW ! * * **+)))))))))))))))))).* * * * * ****. we shall introduce two new derived rules. !I 4. *******! ** * * * * * ******.)))))))))))))))))). 17. * 18. * * * * * 11. *Fb & Hb * 23.More Quantificational Derivations 9. **! *. The two rules have the same name. *****SHOW Ga * * * * * *****+))))))).* * * * * * 13. but they will make many derivations easier.* * * **.)))))-* * * * * * *****. 13. **~Hb * * 19. ›I 2.)))))))))))))))))). The new rules will be equivalence rules that allow us to replace negated quantifications with sentences from which it is easier to derive things.)))))))))))))))))))))))))))ACD ID AID DD 9.)))))))))).))))))))))))))))))))))* 22. 20.* * * * ***.

you must not only move the negation sign to the other side of the quantifer.*Fa & Ha * 12. *~~œxHx * 9. • Use the QN rules whenever you want to infer something from a premise or other line that is a negated quantification. *œxHx * 10. 1. The assumption for such an indirect derivation is the negation of the existentially quantified sentence. from existential to universal. Using QN turns this into a universally quantified negation. ~›x~Hx 3. 10 &I 11. which is usually easier to use in the derivation. ~÷ 6. we can get a much simpler derivation showing the argument above to be quantificationally valid. &E 2. SHOW ›x(Fx & Hx) +))))))))))))))).*Ha * 11. SHOW ›xCx +)))))))))))). as the case may be. • The QN rules are replacement rules and hence can be used on subformulas. 4. ›I Here are some points to keep in mind concerning the Quantifier Negation rules: • Whenever you use a QN rule. you must also change the type of the quantifier. or from universal to existential.*›x(Fx & Hx) * . For instance. Ca w Cb 2.Introductory Logic on the other side of the quantifier and changing the type of the quantifier. *Fa & ~Ga * 7. • The QN rule can help when you are using indirect derivation to derive existentially quantified sentences. QN 8. 246 P ID . *›x~(Fx ÷ Gx) * 5. *~(Fa ÷ Ga) * 6.)))))))))))))))P P DD 1. The following derivation illustrates the last point. *Fa * 8. ›E 5. QN 4. Using these new rules. œE 7. 1. from “œx(Mx ÷ ~œySxy)” you may infer “œx(Mx ÷ ›y~Sxy)” using QN. ~œx(Fx ÷ Gx) 2. DN 9.

~ › x(Zx w Wx). ~œx›y(Mx & Rxy).* . œx[Qxa ÷ (~Sx ÷ Rxb)]. * 5. œx›yRxy 247 . **Cb * * 8. ~›xFx. 6. œxœy(Rxy ÷ Mx). **œx~Cx * * * * 6. ~›x(Qxa & Rxb). ˆ ›x(Cx & ~Dx) 3. ˆ ›x~Tx 5. ˆ œx(Ax ÷ Bx) 2. ~›x(Ax & ~Bx). ~›xœyGxy. œx(Cx w Nx).))))))))))))Exercises 10-1 Show the following arguments quantificationally valid by constructing a derivation: 1. ˆ ~›x(Jx & Rx) 6. œE 1. ˆ œx~Ex 4. œx(Ix ÷ Jxb). ~œxKmx. ˆ œxœyPxy 14. **~Ca 7. ˆ ~›xQx 7. wE 5. ˆ ›x›y~Nxy 13. **~Cb * * 9. QN 5. ~›x(Jx & Px). 8. **! * * *. *SHOW ! * *+)))))))). ›y~›xJyx. *~›xCx * 4. ˆœx(Qxa ÷ Sx) Show the following quantificationally equivalent by producing two appropriate derivations: 15. œx(Qx ÷ ~ ›yPy). !I ›xAx œxBx Show the following quantificationally inconsistent by deriving “!” from them: 17. ~œx(Px ÷ Qx). ~›x(Fx & ~Gx) 18. ˆ ›x~Lx 12. ~œx(›yMxy ÷ œyNxy). œx(Ex ÷ Fx). œx(Lx ÷ œyKyx). ˆ ›xœy~Hxy 10. œE 7. ~›x(Kx & Nx). ~œx(Cx ÷ Dx). ˆ ›x~Ix 11. ~œx(Fx ÷ Gx). ~›x~Bx AID DD 3. œxœy(Oxy ø Pyx). ~œx(Tx & ~Wx). ~›x~œyOxy. ~›x(Rx & ~Px). ˆ œx›y~Gxy 9.)))))))).More Quantificational Derivations 3. ˆ œx(Kx ÷ Cx) 8. ~œx~Ax 16. ~œx›yHxy.

(Otherwise the use of ›E is incorrect. Deciding on a strategy for deriving an existential quantification is tricky. ›xœy(My ÷ Pxy). constructing derivations is not a mechanical matter. remember to follow these guidelines: • A name introduced by ›E must be completely new to the derivation. but you will find it useful to do so. A direct derivation is often best if the premises contain 248 . if there are any. To derive a universally quantified sentence.) • Usually. like the idea that to derive a conditional one should assume the antecedent and try to derive the consequent. In some derivations œE must be used more than once on the same universally quantified sentence. The QN rules help you avoid cumbersome indirect derivations and make derivations simpler. Ingenuity and perseverence are often required. ›x›y(Fx ø ~Fy). Wherever possible. use ›E before œE. In this section we will review the useful strategies for doing quantificational derivations. But there are strategies that can be useful. When picking names for use with the quantifier exploitation rules. Use QN whenever premises or other lines from which you need to derive things are negated quantifications. ›x(Mx & ~›yPyx) 20.Introductory Logic 19. it is a good idea to use names already in the derivation when you use œE. section 4. There are two general strategies for deriving existential quantifications: direct derivation and indirect derivation. Following it will never make a derivation significantly more difficult. When premises or other lines have quantifiers as their main logical operators. This section won’t review the discussion of L1 strategies in Chapter 5.) In some derivations. ~œx›y(Fx ÷ ~Fy) 2: Strategies for Derivations As this book has often said. so that it can be used with all the names in the derivation. incorporating discussion of the new rules. use the quantifier exploitation rules. This strategy. it is useful to look ahead and choose names with an eye to what you want to get. (See the last derivation at the end of the text of section 1 above for an example. is so generally useful that situations where it does not give the shortest derivation can be safely ignored. use UD.

An indirect derivation is possible even in the first case. *~Fa & Ga * 5. SHOW ›x(Fx w ~Fx) +)))))))))))))))))). *›x~Hx * .)))))))))))))). 1. **~Fa * * 8. **œx~(Fx w ~Fx) * * * * 5. **~(Fa w ~Fa) 6. Here the thing said to exist by the conclusion is the thing said to exist in the first premise. *SHOW ! * *+)))))))))))))). œx(Hx ÷ Fx) 3. 2.) 249 . œE 5.More Quantificational Derivations names or existential quantifications that provide for the existence of the thing whose existence is asserted by the conclusion. SHOW ›x~Hx +)))))))))))). &E 6. ›E 2. but it is much trickier to think up. DeM 6. &E 3. but it may be unnecessarily long and convoluted. MT 7. because there are no premises to assert the existence of anything. &E 7. * 4.))))))))))))P P DD 1. !I (Note: there’s a shorter derivation that gets this conclusion by DD. œE 5. 6.))))))))))))))))))ID AID DD 2. An indirect derivation may be necessary when the premises don’t assert the existence of anything in particular. 8. **! * * *. 4.* . *~Fa * 6. QN 4. *Ha ÷ Fa * 7. *~›x(Fx w ~Fx) * 3. *~Ha * 8. ›x(~Fx & Gx) 2. 1. Here is an example where an existential quantification is derived by direct derivation. **~Fa & ~~Fa * * 7. ›I But the following derivation uses indirect derivation. **~~Fa * * 9.

œxZx ÷ Wa. ›x(Cx w Dx) œx(Ex & Fx) œx(Fa ÷ Gx) œx›y(Gx ÷ Hy) ›xœy(Ix ø Iy) ›xœy(Zx ø Zy) œx(Sx ø La) ›x(Sx ø La) ›xCx w ›xDx œxEx & œxFx Fa ÷ œxGx ›xGx ÷ ›yHy ~›xIx w œxIx œxœy(Zx ø Zy) (›xSx ÷ La) & (La ÷ œxSx) (›xSx & La) w (›x~Sx & ~La) Show the following quantificationally inconsistent by deriving “!” from them: 17. 15. 14. ˆ ›x(Zx ÷ Wa) ˆ ›x(Dx ÷ œyDy) (The drinking principle) ˆ ›x(›xMx ÷ Mx) (Cf. ›x~›yFyx Fab & (Fbc & Fca). 12. 3. 18. derive the indicated conclusions. 2. 4. ›xœyFxy. 5. 16. #4 of Exercises 9-6. ~Fcc ›xœyRxy. 19. 11. Is it easier with œxFx ø Ga. 8. ˆ ~›x(Fx & Hx) ›x[Wx & ~›y(Ay & Bxy)]. œxœyœz[(Fxy & Fyz) ÷ Fxz]. 6. ˆ œx[Ax ÷ ›y(Wy & ~Byx)] ˆ œx›yœz(Fxz ÷ Fyz) ID and QN?) Show the following quantificationally equivalent by producing two appropriate derivations: 9. 20. ~œx(Fx ÷ ›yRyx) ›x(Ax & œy[Ay ÷ (Bxy ø ~Byy)]) Given the premises below. Premises: œxœyœz[(Rxy & Ryz) ÷ Rxz] œxœy(Rxy w Ryx) œxœy[Pxy ø (Rxy & ~Ryx)] 250 . 13. ~›x(›yGxy & Hx). ˆ ›x(Fx ø Ga) ˆ œxœy(Txy ÷ ›zTzy) œx›y(Fx ÷ Gxy). 7. 10.Introductory Logic Exercises 10-2 Show the following arguments quantificationally valid by constructing a derivation: 1.

they are not yet adults. but none from New York State. 25. if Alonzo likes Jeffrey. Consider the following argument. and provide a derivation showing it quantificationally valid. œxRxx œx~Pxx œxœy[(Pxy w Pyx) w (Rxy & Ryx)] œxœyœz[(Pxy & Pyz) ÷ Pxz] Provide a suitable interpretation. Therefore. Alonzo does not like anyone who likes no wine from New York State. then some wine from New York State is not red. if any otters are in this room. Therefore. translate each argument into L2. 3: Enthymemes Arguments are often stated with crucial premises missing. All animals that are suitable as pets are affectionate. No otter is affectionate. ˆ Herbert is married to a sister of Bertrand. 27. Herbert is married to Susan. 22. 251 26. you will find that it is quantificationally invalid. 23. Alonzo does not play chess with people whom he does not like. Either Alonzo or Gertrude is a Philosophy major. 28.More Quantificational Derivations Conclusions: 21. Every animal in this room is suitable as a pet. some woman is a member of the chess team. unless it is not yet an adult. Neither Alonzo nor anyone in the same Physics section as Alonzo is a Philosophy major. Jeffrey is a person who likes some red wines. Gertrude has only defeated women at chess. for instance: Bertrand is a brother of Susan. Alonzo plays chess with Gertrude. . Therefore. 24. Gertrude is not in the same Physics section as Alonzo. If you translate this argument into L2 using the following interpretation. Therefore. Alonzo does not like anyone who has not defeated any member of the chess team in a chess game.

and that other is female. Here are two that could turn the argument into a quantificationally valid one: Susan is female. the argument becomes Bbs. this can be shown by the following interpretation: D: The stick figures to the left. If we add a predicate to our interpretation. FÎ: Î is female we can provide a derivation showing that the argument with the added premises is quantificationally valid: 1. ›x(Sxb & Mhx) But this argument is not quantificationally valid. Mhs.Introductory Logic D: People BÎÏ: Î is a brother of Ï MÎÏ: Î is married to Ï SÎÏ: Î is a sister of Ï b: Bertrand h: Herbert s: Susan On this interpretation. Bbs 252 P . If one person is a brother of another. premises that someone making the argument might plausibly take for granted. BÎÏ: A solid arrow goes from Î to Ï MÎÏ: An dotted arrow goes from Î to Ï SÎÏ: A dashed arrow goes from Î to Ï b: the leftmost figure h: the rightmost figure s: the center figure We need to add premises to make the argument valid. then that other is a sister of the first.

It is a matter of trying to understand what the person who produced an argument might have had in mind. 253 38 . D. than it is The word derives from the Greek verb meaning to keep in mind. in which an obviously true premise is not explicitly stated. *Ssb * 10. Then discover obviously true premises which can be added to make quantificationally valid arguments. &I 4. 1. 4. 9. 5. Discovering missing premises is not a matter which can be mechanized. we naturally want to discover the missing premises. ÷E 2. and comparing it with the original interpretation will often suggest the premises that need to be added. œE 6. œE 7. Producing an interpretation that shows it invalid. and if possible. they should be premises that are either obviously true or widely believed to be obviously true.)))))))))))))))))))))2.38 Many arguments we encounter outside of logic texts are actually enthymemes. C.*›x(Sxb & Mhx) * . &I 10 ›I Arguments like this. are called enthymemes. When we encounter one. 3. Exercises 10-3 The following arguments are enthymemes. *(Bbs & Fs) ÷ Ssb * 9.*Ssb & Mhs * 11. One strategy is to first see why the given argument is quantificationally invalid. *œy[(Bby & Fy) ÷ Syb] * 8. New York City is farther from Washington. 3. P P P DD 1. Provide derivations that show the resulting arguments quantificationally valid. Choose suitable interpretations and translate the arguments into L2. 8. Show the resulting arguments are quantificationally invalid by producing suitable interpretations. Premises that are added should be ones that make the argument quantificationally valid.More Quantificational Derivations Mhs Fs œxœy[(Bxy & Fy) ÷ Syx] SHOW ›x(Sxb & Mhx) +))))))))))))))))))))). 6. *Bbs & Fs * 7.

254 . 4. than it is from Washington. New York City is farther from San Francisco than it is from Philadelphia. I am married to a physician. New York City is farther from San Francisco Ca. Gertrude can spell better than anyone who is not older than she is. I go on vacation with some physician. 5. D. Therefore. (Argument due to Kalish and Montague) 2. some woman is not a friend of herself. Gertrude is older than Alonzo. Therefore.Introductory Logic from Philadelphia. Only offices on the fifth floor have good views. & Howe) is a lawyer who embezzles money from his clients. Alonzo’s office does not have a good view. Louis Dewey is liable to disbarment. Alonzo likes any woman who laughs at herself. 6. I vacation with only those who are married to me. Louis Dewey (of Dewey. Therefore. Therefore. but detests any woman who laughs at all her friends. H. C. Therefore. Cheatham. Gertrude can spell better than Alonzo. if any woman laughs at all her friends. Alonzo’s office is in the basement. 3. Therefore. H. Lawyers who commit crimes are liable to disbarment.

Englewood Cliffs. d: Dracula. we can easily symbolize the first conjunct of the premise: œxFxd But how do we express the second conjunct (“Dracula is afraid only of me”)? We would express “Dracula is afraid only of crosses. Consider the following claim: Everyone is afraid of Dracula. 255 39 . (Prentice-Hall. but Dracula is afraid only of me. It follows from this that I am Dracula!39 Since this result is somewhat surprising. explains translations using it. See his What Is the Name of This Book. Using the obvious interpretation (D: people.” thus (CÎ: Î is a cross): ~›x(Fdx & ~Cx) or œx(Fdx ÷ Cx) In order to express “Dracula is afraid only of me” we need to Raymond Smullyan reports getting this argument from Richard Cartwright. 212. FÎÏ: Î is afraid of Ï). m: me. p.Identity Chapter 11: Identity This chapter introduces the logical identity predicate. and presents derivation rules for identity. 1. we would like to be able to show it with a derivation. Translations Using the Identity Predicate: Identity extends our language. 1978). including translation of numerical concepts.

So the second conjunct of the premise about Dracula becomes œx(Fdx ÷ x = m) The whole premise is thus œxFxd & œx(Fdx ÷ x = m) From this you should be able to derive d=m The inference about Dracula and me is surprising because we tend to confuse the first conjunct of the premise. and because the identity predicate is a logical predicate rather than an ordinary one.” We can express this using the two-place identity predicate.” To symbolize “everyone else is afraid of Dracula” (i. we also use the identity predicate.. “Everyone but Dracula is afraid of Dracula”). we will use the equals sign. If we have IÎÏ: Î is identical to Ï.” These two statements are very different: don’t say “everyone” when you really mean “everyone else. “Everyone is afraid of Dracula.Introductory Logic have a predicate that can say “Î is me. thus: œx(~x = d ÷ Fxd) From now on we shall adopt the very common practice of abbreviating “~ x = y” by “x … y". “Everyone else is afraid of Dracula. “=” instead of the “I.” with the very different statement.e. then we can express “x is me” thus: Ixm Following tradition.” and instead of writing it in front of two terms (“=ab”) we will put it in the more natural position between them (“a = b”). So the symbolic sentence above becomes 256 .

SÎÏ: Î saw Ï) œx(Sxg ÷ x = a) and No one but Gertrude saw Alphonse ~›x(x … g & Sxa) and Only Alphonse and Gertrude were in the classroom. which is rather imprecise. we can say. (using CÎ: Î was in the classroom) ~›x[Cx & (x … a & x … g)] or equivalently. a: Alphonse. With some ingenuity. œx[Cx ÷ (x = a w x = g)] We can use identity to express numerical quantities. that there is no more than one): œxœy[(Px & Py) ÷ x = y] 257 .Identity œx(x … d ÷ Fxd) Using the identity predicate we can also symbolize such claims as Only Alphonse saw Gertrude (with D: People. that there is at most one president (that is. Recall that (using PÎ: Î is president of the United States) ›xPx says that there is at least one president of the United States. g: Gertrude. using identity.

There is also a simpler way of saying that there is exactly one president of the United States. We can also say that there is exactly one president of the United States: for if there is at least one and also at most one. but it’s quite a bit harder to understand: 40 ›xœy(Py ø x = y) See whether you can understand why that statement is true if but only if there is exactly one president of the United States. so with two. It also rules out there being more than two distinct presidents. in a manner of speaking: ›x[Px & œy(Py ÷ x = y)] This says that there is a president of the United States. the antecedent of the embedded conditional will always be false. It is a universally quantified conditional: if there are no presidents of the United States. so the whole will be true. Thus ›xPx & œxœy[(Px & Py) ÷ x = y] says that there is exactly one president of the United States. On the other hand. three and all the other positive integers. Suppose that we want to say that there are at least two There’s a still more compact way of saying that there is exactly one president of the United States. then they are identical. So it guarantees that if it is true. and the statement rules that out. there can be no more than one president of the United States. that combines the two conjuncts above into one. there must be exactly one. and every president of the United States is identical to him or her40 As with one.Introductory Logic Observe how this works: it says that if x and y are both presidents of the United States. It thus rules out there being two distinct presidents of the United States. notice that it does not imply that there is any president of the United States. 258 . there would have to be two who were distinct. because if there were more than two.

we must say that the x and y in question are distinct. and every house of Congress is identical to one or the other of them: ›x›y[([Hx & Hy] & x … y) & œz(Hz ÷ [z = x w z = y])] If you are catching on to the pattern behind all this. that is. It would NOT do to say this (using HÎ: Î is a house of Congress): ›x›y(Hx & Hy) WRONG TRANSLATION! This just says that there is at least one house of Congress (and says it twice). we must say that if x. And of course. 259 . however. you can figure out how to say there are at least three members of the House of Representatives from Nebraska (using NÎ: Î is a member of the House of Representatives from Nebraska): ›x›y›z([ x … y & (y … z & x … z)] & [ Nx & (Ny & Nz)]) Saying that there are at most three members of the House of Representatives from Nebraska requires four variables. not identical: ›x›y[ x … y & (Hx & Hy)] To say that there are at most two (no more than two) we use the same technique as with “at most one.Identity houses of Congress. if you follow the pattern. we can say that there are exactly two houses of Congress simply by conjoining the last two statements with “&”.” in this case. we can go on to say that there are exactly three members of the House of Representatives from Nebraska. y. saying that there are two distinct houses of Congress. We can also use the simpler method. this is left as an exercise. To say that there are at least two houses of Congress. and z are all houses of Congress then some pair must be identical: œxœyœz([(Hx & Hy) & Hz] ÷ [x = y w (x = z w y = z)]) Finally.

D: People MÎ: Î is male SÎ: Î is a logic student WÎ: Î is a woman LÎÏ: Î loves Ï TÎÏ: Î is taller than Ï a: Alonzo e: Elaine g: Gertrude 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 No woman logic student other than Gertrude is taller than Alonzo. but no more than two of them love Alonzo. There are more than two women logic students. except Tabitha. No more than one male logic student loves Gertrude. the cat 1 2 3 4 5 The only animal in my back yard is Tabitha I own at least two animals. translate the following into L2 using the identify predicate. Every other logic student is taller than Elaine. Alonzo is taller than any other logic student. 260 . I own exactly three animals. No animal in my back yard. is suitable for a pet. Choose a suitable interpretation and translate the following. Provide your interpretation along with the translation.Introductory Logic Exercises 11-1 Using the given interpretation. Elaine and only Elaine loves Alonzo. Gertrude is taller than at least two male logic students. D: Animals BÎ: Î is in my back yard SÎ: Î is suitable for a pet MÎ: Î is owned by me t: Tabitha. There is exactly one animal in my back yard that is suitable for a pet.

e. King) James Buchanan has been the only president from Pennsylvania. B. The Detroit Tigers are a major league baseball team from Detroit.g. In order to discover a better way of symbolizing such sentences as the first premise of the argument above. (B.Identity 13 14 15 16 Nobody loves me but my mother. Definite Descriptions: Definite descriptions identify a single thing. ˆ The Detroit Tigers defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. m: The major league baseball team from Detroit we will not have any way to connect the first premise with what is said in the second premise. [Understand this to say no man can serve more than one master. Suppose we have the following argument: The major league baseball team from Detroit defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. A definite description is a term that refers to just one thing by identifying a property that is possessed uniquely by that thing. No presidents other than Andrew Johnson and William Clinton have been impeached.. Philosophers call such terms definite descriptions. No man can serve two masters.] 2. we need to think about terms like The major league baseball team from Detroit. but how can we symbolize it so that the resulting symbolic argument is valid? The first premise says that a certain team nearly defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. Here are some examples: 261 . and she could be jivin’ too. If we choose a name to represent that team. This argument looks valid.

remembering what we have learned about symbolizing claims for the form. “On Denoting. FÎ: Î is from Detroit. 479-493 41 262 .” Mind. “there is exactly one . for instance. The building referred to by the description is the one and only building in the world with that property.. DÎÏ: Î defeated Ï last night. The philosopher Bertrand Russell proposed a way of analyzing sentences using definite descriptions. and any major league baseball team from Detroit is identical to it. 14 (1905). The major league baseball from Detroit defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night.Introductory Logic The tallest building in the world The fifth floor of Lattimore Hall The intersection of Elmwood and Goodman in Rochester The first test for this course The first of these definite descriptions. pp. we can easily symbolize the sentence. According to Russell’s analysis. With this analysis.41 and we shall adopt his analysis in this book.” (With D: things. Bertrand. This sentence will be true only if there is exactly one major league baseball team from Detroit and that team defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. the sentence. vol. and it defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. Should be analyzed this way: There is one and only one major league baseball team from Detroit and it defeated the Baltimore Orioles last night. MÎ: Î is a major league baseball team. It will be false if Russell. b: The Baltimore Orioles) ›x([(Mx & Rx) & œy[(My & Ry) ÷ y = x]) & Dxb) This says that here is something that is a major league baseball team and is from Detroit.. refers to a particular building by means of the property of being taller than any other building in the world.

therefore. It might be taken to be attempting to assert of the present king of France that he is not bald. he was concerned about sentences like this: The present king of France is bald. Someone might think that this sentence refers to something. or if the Baltimore Orioles were not defeated by such a team last night. for a sentence like The present king of France is not bald. the phrase “the present king of France” cannot refer to any king of France. or if there is more than one. The sentence. the present king of France. and that this was bald. on this analysis. and says that it is bald. The sentence is false. But since there was no king of France when Russell was working on this problem (and still is none today). for instance? Russell thought such an idea nonsense. In general. BÎ: Î is bald): ›x[(Kx & œy[Ky ÷ y = x]) & Bx] Complications arise. in other 263 . This sentence is ambiguous. Could it refer to some other mysterious entity—a subsisting but not existing king of France. and does not refer to any odd entity. KÎ: Î is presently king of France.Identity there is no major league baseball team from Detroit. he claimed. simply claimed that there was one and only one thing that was presently king of France. a sentence of the form The F is G is analyzed as There is exactly one F and it is G and symbolized as ›x[(Fx & œy[Fy ÷ y = x]) & Gx] When Russell developed his analysis. on Russell’s account. We would symbolize the sentence thus (D: people. since there is no such thing.

since there is presently no King of France. The President of the United States is not a crook. The president congratulated the winner. PÎ: Î is president. ›x[(Kx & œy[Ky ÷ y = x]) & ~Bx] ~›x[(Kx & œy[Ky ÷ y = x]) & Bx] Note that the only difference between the two symbolizations is the placement of the “~”. Here’s how to symbolize the two sentences. We would usually simply assume that he is asserting of the president that he is not a crook. Or it might be taken to be the denial of the sentence “the present king of France is bald. Since the two readings of the sentence differ in truth value only when there is either no president or more than one.Introductory Logic words. even though we often don’t notice it because one of the readings is not plausible in the context. we don’t pay any attention to the ambiguity because we are confident that there is exactly one president of the United States. A sentence may involve two definite descriptions. such as. since the latter sentence is false. GÎ: Î is gold): œx(Sx ÷ ~Gx) ~œx(Sx ÷ Gx) Sentences involving negations and definite descriptions often involve this ambiguity. CÎÏ: Î congratulated Ï): 264 . we say they differ in the scope of the negation. This is analogous to the ambiguity of All that glitters is not gold. If someone says. which we can symbolize thus (D: people. WÎ : Î is a winner. SÎ: Î glitters.” in which case it is true. to say that there is exactly one entity that is presently king of France and it is not bald. which has two readings that could be symbolized as follows (D: things. This sentence would be false.

and quantificational equivalence are the same for sentences of L2 generally (see Chapter 8). 6. and non-equivalence in the same ways that we did so for sentences of L2 in Chapter 8. œx(x = a w x = b). For instance.Identity ›x[([Px & œy(Py ÷ y = x)] & ›z[Wz & œy(Wy ÷ y = z)]) & Cxz] Exercises 11-2 Translate the following using the interpretation given. Hubert loves no one but kissed the woman Alonzo loves. consistency. 4. Hence we can show invalidity. Consistency. 5. The woman who kissed Alonzo has red hair. quantificational inconsistency. 3: Showing Invalidity. which 265 . the following set of sentences. Gertrude loves the man who loves Ethel. The man Gertrude loves kissed the woman Alonzo loves. Alonzo loves a woman who kissed the man who loves Gertrude. ~Fa can be shown consistent by the following interpretation. but not the man who loves her. Non-equivalence The definitions of quantificational validity. The woman whom Alonzo loves kissed Hubert. 3. 2. ›xFx. D: People MÎ: Î is a man RÎ: Î has red hair WÎ: Î is a woman KÎÏ: Î kissed Ï LÎÏ: Î loves Ï a: Alonzo e: Ethel g: Gertrude h: Hubert 1.

but identity makes several differences to the procedure. however. if there is an interpretation with a given sized domain that makes a sentence true. It cannot be true on interpretations that have more than one item in their domains. a given domain may be too large to make a sentence true. when the sentences involve identity. First. as already noted. Expansion in finite domain can also be used with sentences involving identity. When we perform an expansion in a finite domain for sentences without identity. As we noted in Chapter 8. the atomic sentences we get are logically independent: you can assign distinct atomic sentences any truth values you like. You can see this easily. But this is not true when sentences involving identity are involved.” This can be true only on interpretations having exactly one item in their domains. Consider the following sentence: œx(x = a) This sentence says that everything is identical to the item named “a. Second there are complications due to the fact that atomic sentences involving identity may not be logically independent. for L2 sentences without identity.Introductory Logic makes all of them true: D: The stick figures to the left FÎ: Î has an “F” above it a: the figure on the left b: the figure on the right There is one important difference that identity makes. For instance. this is not true. However. suppose we expand the following sentence in a domain of two elements: œx(x=a ÷ Fx) 266 . for any larger domain size there is also an interpretation with that size domain that makes the sentence true.

Consider “a = a. 2. then N and R must be assigned the same truth value. Otherwise we would not be respecting the logical properties of identity. If : and 0 are names. Fb Now we are not free to assign these atomic sentences whatever truth values we please. then any sentence 0 = 0 must be assigned the value True. If 0 is a name. then we must also make “b = a” true. then “Fa” will be true if and only if “Fb” is. or vice versa.” for instance. We try to expand in a domain of two members. Hence we must follow these restrictions when assigning truth values to atomic sentences involving identity: 1. Fa. Also. we must make “Fa” and “Fb” either both true or both false. getting this: [(a = a ÷ Faa) & (a = b ÷ Fab)] & [(b = a ÷ Fba) & (b = b ÷ Fbb)] (~Faa w ~Fab) w (~Fba w ~Fbb) 267 . a = b. If we do. we must find an interpretation that makes them all true. If “a” and “b” are names for the same object. and a sentence : = 0 is assigned the value True. Let’s illustrate all this by doing an example. and N and R are sentences that differ only in that one has 0 in one or more places where R has :. Further.Identity We get this: (a = a ÷ Fa) & (a = b ÷ Fb) The atomic sentences are: a = a. It must obviously be assigned the value True. consider what happens if we assign “a = b” the value True. Consider the following set of sentences: œxœy(x = y ÷ Fxy) ›x›y~Fxy If we wish to show these consistent.

But if all the atomic sentences are true. 2. 8.1>.Introductory Logic We must make “a = a” and “b = b” true. ˆ œxœy(x = y ÷ Gxy) ˆ œxœy›z( x = y ÷ x … z) Show the following pairs of sentences are not equivalent by producing a suitable interpretation in a small finite domain. 5. <1. since we made “Faa” true. 7. Hence.2> <2.Ï> is in {<1. Further. For since “a = a” is true. ˆ ›x›z[ x … z & (Fx & Fz)] œxœy(Gxy ÷ x = y). to make the first sentence true. Should we make “a = b” true? If we do. we must make “Faa” and “Fbb” true. 3. So here is an interpretation that works: D: The stick figures to the left FÎÏ: An arrow goes from Î to Ï or. ˆ œz(z = r ÷ Wz) ˆ ›x›y(Mxy & ~ x = y) œxœy[(Fx ø Fy) ø x = y]. 2} FÎÏ: <Î. if “a = b” is true. differently: D: {1. Consequently we must make “a = b” false. Then if we let at least one of “Fab” and “Fba” be false. we must make all of the rest of the atomic sentences true as well. ›xFx. 268 œx›y x = y œxœy x = y œxœy[x = y ÷ (Fx ø Fy)] œxœy[(Fx ø Fy) ÷ x = y] (a = b w a = c) ÷ a = d a = c ÷ (a = b w a = d) . the second sentence can come out true.2>} Exercises 11-3 Provide interpretations in small finite domains showing the following invalid. 1. 4. then “Fab” and “Fba” would have to be true as well. and so “b = a” false as well. 6. if “a = b” is true then “b = a” must be also. then the second sentence will be false.

but it is not. We will introduce identity introduction and identity exploitation (in two forms). *Fdd * 5. 12. followed by the same name again. ›x›y[(Fx & Fy) & x … y] œx(Gx ÷ x = a). We don’t need to have any earlier lines to license this. 13. œE 1. œE 4.Identity 9. whenever we want. ›xœy(x … y ÷ Gy) ›xœy(Gy ÷ x … y) Show the following consistent by providing a suitable interpretation in a small finite domain. 3. &E 3. For instance. *œx(Fdx ÷ x = m) * 6. we may write down any name. Derivations with Identity: We can do some derivations involving identity with the rules we have already learned. there are derivation rules involving it as well. *d = m * . ~›x›y[(Fx & Gy) & x = y]. It may seem that this rule would be useless. ÷E But since identity is a logical predicate. &E 5. œxFxd & œx(Fdx ÷ x = m) Pr 2. ~›x(x … b & ~Mx) ›x›y x… y. 11. *Fdd ÷ d = m * 7. the derivation showing that the argument involving Dracula and me is valid might go like this: 1. The identity introduction rule looks like this: =I ))))))) 0 = 0 where 0 is any name In other words.)))))))))))))))))- DD 1. For instance. œx›yQxy 4. ›x(~Gx & x = a) œx(Mx ÷ x = a). ~›zQzz. *œxFxd * 4. a … b. 10. Show d = m +))))))))))))))))). suppose we wish to show that 269 . followed by the identity symbol. we may just write it down. 5.

**a = a * * *. Wmt 2. *Show a = a * *+))))))))))). If Mark Twain wrote Tom Sawyer and Mark Twain is identical to Samuel Clemens. *p = p ÷ Jp * 4. and we know that : is identical to 0. ÷E The identity exploitation rule has two forms: =E 0= : N[0] := 0 N[0] 0 and : are any names N[0] is any formula containing some 0’s N[:/0] is N[0] with some or all of the 0’s changed to :’s )))) )))) N[:/0] N[:/0] This rule says that if we know some fact involving 0. then Samuel Clemens wrote Tom Sawyer.)))))))))))))))- DD =I Or consider the following derivation: 1. * 3. Show Jp +))))))))))). *p = p * 5. *Jp * .)))))))))))P DD 1. then we know the same fact about :. 1. 4. œx(x = p ÷ Jx) 2.))))))))))).Introductory Logic every thing is self-identical.* . m = c 270 P P . œE =I 3. 1. 2. 3. Show œx x = x UD +))))))))))))))).

Show b = a +))))))))). ›x(Rx & Txg) 3.” You could use this technique to show that “a = b” is equivalent to “b = a. *Ra * . *b = a * . Show Wct DD +))))))))). *a = a * 4. =E Here we first used identity introduction to get “a = a. as in the following derivation: 1. ÷E 4. =E .” We also use identity exploitation to show that identity is transitive: 1.)))))))))We can also use identity exploitation to provide a derivation showing that the following argument is valid: Only Alphonse is taller than Gertrude. 3. œx(Txg ÷ x = a) 2. 3. 8. *Rb & Tbg * 5.” Then we used “a = b” and identity exploitation to replace one “a” in “a = a” with “b. *Wct * 1. ›E 4. 4. =E Identity exploitation can also be used to do some tricky maneuvers. Show a = c P P DD 271 . œE 5.))))))))))))))P P DD 2.)))))))))P DD =I 1. *Tbg * 6. *Tbg ÷ b = a * 7 *b = a * 8. ˆ Alphonse has red hair 1. a = b 2. 6. &E 7. Someone with red hair is taller than Gertrude. &E 1. 4. *Rb * 9. Show Ra +)))))))))))))). a = b 2. 2. b = c 3.Identity 3.

2. * 4. ***a = b * * * **. 4. Show Rg DD +))))))))))))))))))))))))))).&E 6. œE 6. * * 5. ›x([Mxa & œy(Mya ÷ y = x)] & Rx) P 2. Suppose we have this argument: The person who met Alphonse last night had red hair. ˆ Gertrude has red hair. Show œxœy x = y +)))))))))))))))))). *g = b * 2. Mga P 3.7.&E 10.))))))))))))))))))P UD UD DD 1. Gertrude met Alphonse last night.* * *. ›E 5. *Show œy a = y * *+)))))))))))))). *Rb * 4. *Mga ÷ g = b * 6.9. 3. ***c = a * * * 7. A derivation showing that argument valid could look like this: 1.=E .* .Introductory Logic +))))))))). 4. 1.›E 5.7 =E 272 .)))))))))))))))))))))))))))Usually we cannot derive a universally quantified statement from its existentially quantified counterpart. ***œy c = y * * * 6.)))))))))- 1. œE 5.œE 8.)))))))))). *Mba & œy(Mya ÷ y = b) * 4.)))))))))))))).&E 7. *[Mba & œy(Mya ÷ y = b)] & Rb * 1. ***c = b * * * 8. But the following derivation shows that there are exceptions to this. ›xœy x = y 2. *œy(Mya ÷ y = b) * 5. **Show a = b * * **+)))))))))).÷E 9. *a = c * .*Rg * 8. =E A characteristic use of the identity exploitation rule is in arguments involving definite descriptions.

* * * **. 1. ~›xGxx. Show œx(~Fx ÷ x … a) +)))))))))))))))))). 7. ›xœy(Ay ø x = y) œxœy[(Bx & By) ÷ x = y] ›x[Ax & œy(Ay ÷ x = y)] ›xœy(By ÷ x = y) Provide derivations showing the following sets of sentences inconsistent.Identity You sometimes hear people who have not studied logic claim that a universal statement cannot be derived from a particular one. * * * 8. 4. 1. * 4. 3. ~›x›y x … y 273 . 8. recall that “x … y” is just “~ x = y”. Rt. Fa 2. !I ˆ œxœyœz[(x = y & y = z) ÷ x = z] ~Cr. **~Fb * * 5.))))))))))))))))))Exercises 11-4 Provide derivations showing the following valid. ˆ Nt ˆ œxœy(x = y ÷ y = x) ˆ œx›y x = y ›xFx & ›yGy ~›x(Fx & Gx) ˆ ›x›y( x … y & [(Fx w Gx) & (Fy w Gy)]) Provide derivations showing the following equivalent. 9.)))))). ****! * * * * ***. ***Show ! * * * ***+)))))). * * 6. In this derivation. 6. 6. P UD CD ACD ID AID DD 4. ***b = a * * * 7. The following demonstration shows that this is not so. 2. 3. œx›yGxy. ˆ œx›y(Cx ÷ x … y) ›x([Rx & œy(Ry ÷ x = y)] & Nx).* . =E 1.* * *. **Show b … a * * **+)))))))))). 8. *Show ~Fb ÷ b … a * *+)))))))))))))).)))))))))). 5.)))))))))))))). ****~Fa * * * * 9.

ˆ ›xFx ø Fa œx(x = a w x = b). Provide derivations that show the following arugments valid. ˆ œxFx ø Fa œx x = a. ˆ œxFx ø (Fa & Fb) œx(x = a w x = b). 13. 14. œx(Yx ÷ Fx). ˆ ›xFx ø (Fa w Fb) 274 . ›x›y[ x … y & (Yx & Yy)] ›xœy x = y. œx x = a. ~›x(Fx & Dx) œxœy(Fxy ÷ x … y). 12. 15. ›xFxx The following derivations indicate how we might justify some of the claims made in Chapter 8 about expansion in finite domains. ›xœy(Fy ÷ y = x). 11. ›xFx.Introductory Logic 10. ›yDy. 16.

so they cannot be equivalent. and so one of them must be true. Cheddar cheese is made from milk. "Schnee" is the German word for snow. 3. False. False. Exercises 1-A2 1. the first is true and the second false. Frederick Barbarossa shares the name "Barbarossa" with a Barbary pirate of the sixteenth century. Consider. Khayr al-Din." the "olo" as in "colonel. all instances of F1 are sets of inconsistent sentences. "Phtholognyrrh" is pronounced the same as "turner.4: 1. False. True 7. William Jefferson Clinton and Hilary Rodham Clinton are parents of Chelsea Clinton. 11. 1999 is a Wednesday. "Keep Off the Grass. Here is an invalid argument with true premises and conclusion: January 13. Both these sentences are true. False. An inconsistent form must have no instances where all the sentences are true. 9." the "phth" as in "phthisis. "Send" has four letters." 7.5 1. True (provided it has at least one false premise). True 3. For instance." 275 . but the following is an instance of F3: All dogs are mammals. for instance." the "yrrh" as in "myrrh. True 5. The sign said. 3. Exercises 1. (I1) on page 7. [no change] 5. but each instance consists of two sentences with opposite truth values. The first sentence is true.Answers to Odd Exercises Chapter 1 Exercises 1. 9. Therefore. 5.

Unofficial sentence. Main connective: ÷ (A ÷ (B w C)) | --------------| | A (B w C) | --------| | B C 3. at end. or misplaced parentheses. Main connective: ÷ | T ((P ÷ (Q & R)) ÷ ((P ÷ Q) & (P ÷ R))) | ------------------------------------| | (P ÷ (Q & R) ((P ÷ Q) & (P ÷ R)) | | --------------------------------------| | | | (P ÷ R) P (Q & R) (P ÷ Q) | | | -------------------------------| | | | | | Q R P Q P R 13. Not a sentence.1 1. 9. Lower case letters are not part of the language. No rule allows “(A)” to appear in a sentence. (Lacks one right parenthesis.) Not a sentence. Not a sentence. Not a sentence. Too many parentheses. Unofficial Sentence. (([P ÷ Q] w R) & (S ø T)) or ([P ÷ Q] w R) & (S ø T) 276 . 7. 5. Main connective: w (((~P ÷ R) & S) w T) | -------------------------| ((~P ÷ R) & S) | -------------| | (~P ÷ R) S | ---------------| | ~P R | P 11.Introductory Logic Chapter 2: Exercises 2. Unofficial Sentence.

27. Exercises 2-4: 1. L & ~E 13. Alonzo did not disgrace himself. M ø C 7. Either Ellen was drunk or she danced lewdly. 11. Exercises 2. If the boss is angry. T ø S 7. Alonzo doesn't study logic and Bertha doesn't study logic. 9.3: 1. H ÷ (W w ~B) or H ÷ (~~B ÷ W) or (H ÷ W) w ~B or ~~B ÷ (H ÷ W) 15. ~A 3. 5. If cows are not mammals then Bertha studies logic. ~T 3. and the network is down. 3. ~E ÷ A 11. Ethel is taking pregnancy leave. If Julius did not have a good time. E ÷ L 19. A ÷ (~B w C) = T | ----------------------| | A = T (~B w C) = T | ----------| | ~B = T C = T 277 . Unless Ellen Danced lewdly. then the Wilbursteen project will be two weeks late unless Sylvia is promoted. If it rains on Sunday and there's a picnic. 13. ~~A ÷ ~J or J ÷ ~A or E w A 9. If Bertha studies logic Alonzo studies logic. T w S 5. then Ethel will be distressed and either Alonzo or Gertrude won't be there. ~C ÷ ~M 9. (S ÷ J) & (~S ÷ A) 21. 25. Alonzo did not disgrace himself. Chapter 3 Exercise 3-1 1. ~E & L 17.would be correct. A w B 5. 1. 11. 13.] 23. ~(T w S) or ~T & ~S 15. 7. A ÷ S [Note: there are other equivalent English translations also for the following. Exercises 2-5: (A ÷ ~E) & (G ø A) [(P & A) ÷ E] & [~S ÷ (~P ÷ M)] (~~R ÷ M) & (~R ÷ [(A & G) & ~E]) [R ÷ (~P & E)] & (~R ÷ [P & (A & G)]) Unless it rains on Sunday there will be a picnic and Alonzo will come to it if and only of Gertrude does.

~~[(A & B) ø (~F w B)] = F | ~[(A & B) ø (~F w B)] = T | [(A & B) ø (~F w B)] = F | -----------------------------| | (A & B) = F ~F w B = T | | ---------------------------| | | | A = T B = F ~F = T B = F | F = F (B & A) ø [(C w F) ÷ D] = T | ------------------------| | B & A = F (C w F) ÷ D = F | | -----------------------------------| | | | B = F A = T C w F = T D = F | --------| | C = T F = F ----------------------------------------| A | B | C | D | (A ø B) w (C ø D) | ----------------------------------------| T | F | T | F | T F F F T F F | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| B | C | D | F | (B ÷ C) ÷ [(D & F) w ~(B & C)] | --------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F | F T T T F F F T TF F T | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| B | C | D | E | F | (B w C) ø ~[D ÷ (E & F)] | ---------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | T | F | F T T F F F T T F F | ---------------------------------------------------- 5. Exercise 3-2 1.Introductory Logic | B = F 3. 7. ------------------------| M | N | M ÷ (~N w M) | ------------------------| T | T | T T FT T T | ------------------------- 278 . 9. 11.

279 .| T | F | T T TF T T | ------------------------| F | T | F T FT F F | ------------------------| F | F | F T TF T F | ------------------------3. Exercise 3-4 1. -----------------------------------| A | C | D | (A ÷ D) ÷ (~C & D) | -----------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T F FT F T | -----------------------------------| T | T | F | T F F T FT F F | -----------------------------------| T | F | T | T T T T TF T T | -----------------------------------| T | F | F | T F F T TF F F | -----------------------------------| F | T | T | F T T F FT F T | -----------------------------------| F | T | F | F T F F FT F F | -----------------------------------| F | F | T | F T T T TF T T | -----------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F F TF F F | -----------------------------------------------------------------| A | F | G | A w (~F ø G) | ------------------------------| T | T | T | T T FT F T | ------------------------------| T | T | F | T T FT T F | ------------------------------| T | F | T | T T TF T T | ------------------------------| T | F | F | T T TF F F | ------------------------------| F | T | T | F F FT F T | ------------------------------| F | T | F | F T FT T F | ------------------------------| F | F | T | F T TF T T | ------------------------------| F | F | F | F F TF F F | ------------------------------- 5. ------------------------------| B | C | B ÷ C | B | ~C | ------------------------------| T | T | T T T | T | FT | ------------------------------| T | F | T F F | T | TF | ------------------------------| F | T | F T T | F | FT | ------------------------------| F | F | F T F | F | TF | ------------------------------The table shows the sentences inconsistent because in no row are all three sentences assigned the value True.

-------------------------------| P | Q | P ÷ Q | P ÷ ~Q | -------------------------------| F | T | F T T | F T FT | -------------------------------| F | F | F T F | F T TF | -------------------------------[Either line will do.Introductory Logic 3. 5. 7. -------------------------------------------------------------| K | L | M | K & (L w M) | L ÷ (K ø ~M) | ~M ø ~L | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | T F T F FT | FT T FT | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T T T T F | T T T T TF | TF F FT | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T T F T T | F T T F FT | FT F TF | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T F F F F | F T T T TF | TF T TF | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F F T T T | T T F T FT | FT T FT | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F F T T F | T F F F TF | TF F FT | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F F T T | F T F T FT | FT F TF | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F F F | F T F F TF | TF T TF | -------------------------------------------------------------The table shows the sentences inconsistent because in no row are all three sentences assigned the value True.] 9. ----------------------------------------- 280 . ------------------------------------------| E | F | G | E & ~F | G ÷ F | ~E w G | ------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T F FT | T T T | FT T T | ------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T F FT | F T T | FT F F | ------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T T TF | T F F | FT T T | ------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T T TF | F T F | FT F F | ------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F F FT | T T T | TF T T | ------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F F FT | F T T | TF T F | ------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F TF | T F F | TF T T | ------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F TF | F T F | TF T F | ------------------------------------------The table shows the sentences inconsistent because in no row are all three sentences assigned the value True.

| P R S | (R w S) ø P | R ÷ ~P | ~R ÷ S | ----------------------------------------| T F T | F T T T T | F T FT | TF T T | ----------------------------------------11. ---------------------------------------------------| K | R | T | ~(R & K) & T | (T & ~R) w (T & ~K) | ---------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | F T T T F T | T F FT F T F FT | ---------------------------------------------------- 281 . 13. ------------------------------------| A | M | A ø ~M | ~(A ø M) | ------------------------------------| T | T | T F FT | F T T T | ------------------------------------| T | F | T T TF | T T F F | ------------------------------------| F | T | F T FT | T F F T | ------------------------------------| F | F | F F TF | F F T F | ------------------------------------In all lines the two sentences have the same truth values. 17. 15. ------------------------------------------------| C | D | R | ~C w (D ÷ ~R) | (C & D) ÷ ~R | ------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | FT F T F FT | T T T F FT | ------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | FT T T T TF | T T T T TF | ------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | FT T F T FT | T F F T FT | ------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | FT T F T TF | T F F T TF | ------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | TF T T F FT | F F T T FT | ------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | TF T T T TF | F F T T TF | ------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | TF T F T FT | F F F T FT | ------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | TF T F T TF | F F F T TF | ------------------------------------------------In all lines the two sentences have the same truth values. ------------------------------------------------------| A | Y | Z | (Z & ~Y) ÷ ~A | A ÷ ~Z | A w ~Y | ------------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | F F FT T FT | T T TF | T T FT | ------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F F TF T FT | T T TF | T T TF | ------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T T TF T TF | F T FT | F T TF | ------------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F TF T TF | F T TF | F T TF | ------------------------------------------------------Any of these lines will do.

23. 19. -------------------------| P | Q | P & Q | P w Q | -------------------------| T | T | T T T | T T T | -------------------------| T | F | T F F | T T F | -------------------------| F | T | F F T | F T T | 282 .Introductory Logic | T | T | F | F T T T F F | F F FT F F F FT | ---------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F F T T T | T T TF T T F FT | ---------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T F F T F F | F F TF F F F FT | ---------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T T F F T T | T F FT T T T TF | ---------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | T T F F F F | F F FT F F F TF | ---------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T F F F T T | T T TF T T T TF | ---------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | T F F F F F | F F TF F F F TF | ---------------------------------------------------In all lines the two sentences have the same truth values. ------------------------------------------------------| | P | Q | X | (P & Q) ÷ X | (P ÷ X) & (Q ÷ X) ------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T F F T F | T F F F F T F | ------------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F F T T F | F T F F T F F | ------------------------------------------------------Either line will do. ------------------------------| I | Q | I ÷ Q | Q ÷ I | ------------------------------| T | F | T F F | F T T | ------------------------------| F | T | F T T | T F F | ------------------------------Either line will do. 25. 21. ------------------------------------------------------| K | L | S | (L & K) ø (L & S) | L & (K ø S) | ------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | F F T T F F T | F F T T T | ------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F F T T F F F | F F T F F | ------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F F T F F T | F F F F T | ------------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F T F F F | F F F T F | ------------------------------------------------------Any of these lines will do.

283 . 31.-------------------------| F | F | F F F | F F F | -------------------------There is no line where the premise is true and the conclusion false. 29. -----------------------------------------------------| F | I | K | K ø (I & F) | F ÷ I | F ÷ K | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | T T T | T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | F F T T T | T T T | T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F F F T | T F F | T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F T F F T | T F F | T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T F T F F | F T T | F T T | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T T F F | F T T | F T F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T F F F F | F T F | F T T | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F F F | F T F | F T F | -----------------------------------------------------There is no line where both premises are true and the conlusion is false. ------------------------------| Q | X | Q ÷ X | X ÷ Q | ------------------------------| F | T | F T T | T F F | ------------------------------------------------------------------------| A | B | M | B w (M & A) | B & (M w A) | 33. ---------------------------------------------------| P | S | T | (P w S) & T | ~(P & T) ÷ (S & T) | ---------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | F T T T T T T T | ----------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T T T F F | T T F F F T F F | ----------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T T F T T | F T T T T F F T | ----------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T T F F F | T T F F F F F F | ----------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F T T T T | T F F T T T T T | ----------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T T F F | T F F F F T F F | ----------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F F F T | T F F T F F F T | ----------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F F F | T F F F F F F F | ----------------------------------------------------There is no row where the premise is true and the conclusion false. 27.

------------------------------------------------------------| J | P | R | (P ÷ J) & R | ~R ÷ ~J | R ÷ (P & ~J) | ------------------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | FT T FT | T F T F FT | ------------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | F T T T T | FT T FT | T F F F FT | ------------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F T F T T | FT T TF | T F F F TF | ------------------------------------------------------------Any of these lines will do. -------------------------------------------------------------|C |P |Z | P ÷ (C ø Z)| ~(Z & P) |(C ø P) & (~C ø P)| -------------------------------------------------------------|T |T |T | T T T T T F T T T T T T F FT F T | -------------------------------------------------------------|T |T |F | T F T F F T F F T T T T F FT F T | -------------------------------------------------------------|T |F |T | F T T T T T T F F T F F F FT T F | -------------------------------------------------------------|T |F |F | F T T F F T F F F T F F F FT T F | -------------------------------------------------------------|F |T |T | T F F F T F T T T F F T F TF T T | -------------------------------------------------------------|F |T |F | T T F T F T F F T F F T F TF T T | -------------------------------------------------------------|F |F |T | F T F F T T T F F F T F F TF F F | -------------------------------------------------------------|F |F |F | F T F T F T F F F F T F F TF F F | -------------------------------------------------------------Inconsistent. -----------------------------------------------------R ÷ L | ~L & (~R w F) | | F | L | R | F ÷ R | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F | F T F | TF T TF T F | -----------------------------------------------------Consistent. 39.Introductory Logic ------------------------------------------| T | F | T | F T T T T | F F T T T | ------------------------------------------| F | T | F | T T F F F | T F F F F | ------------------------------------------Either of these lines will do. 41. ---------------------------------------------------| D | I | K | I ÷ (D & K) | D ÷ ~K | D w I | ---------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F T T F F | T T TF | T T F | ---------------------------------------------------- 284 . 35. 37.

49. -------------------------------------------| K | L | M | K ø L | L w M | K w M | -------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T | T T T | T T T | 45. -------------------------------------------------------------| D | P | Q | (P & D) w (~P & D) | (Q ÷ D) & (~D ÷ Q ) | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T FT F T | T T T T FT T T | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T T T T FT F T | F T T T FT T F | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | F F T T TF T T | T T T T FT T T | -------------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F F T T TF T T | F T T T FT T F | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T F F F FT F F | T F F F TF T T | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | T F F F FT F F | F T F F TF F F | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F F F TF F F | T F F F TF T T | -------------------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F F TF F F | F T F F TF F F | -------------------------------------------------------------Equivalent. 285 . ---------------------------------------------| | B | J | P | P ÷ (B & J) | (P ÷ B) ÷ J ---------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F T T F F | F T T F F | ---------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T F F F T | T F F T T | ---------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T F F F F | T F F T F | ---------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F F F | F T F F F | ---------------------------------------------Not equivalent.Consistent. 43. ----------------------------------------------------------| C | P | U | (C w P) ø (P & U) | (P & U) w (~P & ~C) | ----------------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T T T | T T T T FT F FT | ----------------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T T T F T F F | T F F T FT F FT | ----------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T T F F F F T | F F T F TF F FT | ----------------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T T F F F F F | F F F F TF F FT | ----------------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F T T T T T T | T T T F FT F TF | ----------------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T T F T F F | T F F F FT F TF | ----------------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F F F T F F T | F F T T TF T TF | ----------------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F T F F F | F F F T TF T TF | ----------------------------------------------------------Equivalent. 47.

Exercises 3.5 1. P: The pointy-haired boss is mad. ------------------------------------------| H | R | T | H ø (R w T) | ~T | H | ------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F F F | TF | F | ------------------------------------------Invalid. B: Bert got lots of sleep. F ÷ (P w ~W) P & W P ÷ ~F --------------------------------------------------| F | P | W | F ÷ (P w ~W) | P & W | P ÷ ~F | --------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F T T T FT | T T T | T T TF | --------------------------------------------------Consistent. ------------------------------------------------------| B | Q | S | ~[B & (S ÷ Q)] | B & (Q ÷ S) | Q | ------------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T T F T F F | T T F T T | F | ------------------------------------------------------Invalid. E: Ernie got lots of sleep. W: Wally will be promoted. F: The Flugelhenim project is delayed. 3.Introductory Logic -------------------------------------------| T | T | F | T T T | T T F | T T F | -------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F F | F T T | T T T | -------------------------------------------| T | F | F | T F F | F F F | T T F | -------------------------------------------| F | T | T | F F T | T T T | F T T | -------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F F T | T T F | F F F | -------------------------------------------| F | F | T | F T F | F T T | F T T | -------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F | F F F | F F F | -------------------------------------------Valid. 51. O & (E ø O ÷ E ~(B & E) B) 286 . 53. O: Oscar got lots of sleep.

G: It will be a good game. P: We will pass the course. B: The blue teams's star player is healthy. 7.-----------------------------------------------------| B | E | O | O & (E ø B) | O ÷ E | ~(B & E) | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | T T T | F T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | F F T T T | F T T | F T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F F F T | T F F | T T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F F F F T | F T F | T T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T F T F F | T T T | T F F T | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F F T F F | F T T | T F F T | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T T F T F | T F F | T F F F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F F F T F | F T F | T F F F | -----------------------------------------------------Inconsistent. 5. W ÷ (P & L) (W ÷ P) & (W ÷ L) -----------------------------------------------------| L | P | W | W ÷ (P & L) | (W ÷ P) & (W ÷ L) | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | T T T T T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | F T T T T | F T T T F T T | 287 . W: We work hard. L: We well learn a lot. R: The read team is free from injuries. R ÷ (B ÷ G) ~G ÷ ~(R & B) -------------------------------------------------| B | G | R | R ÷ (B ÷ G) | ~G ÷ ~(R & B) | -------------------------------------------------| T | T | T | T T T T T | FT T F T T T | -------------------------------------------------| T | T | F | F T T T T | FT T T F F T | -------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F T F F | TF F F T T T | -------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F T T F F | TF T T F F T | -------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T T F T T | FT T T T F F | -------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T F T T | FT T T F F F | -------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T T F T F | TF T T T F F | -------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F T F | TF T T F F F | -------------------------------------------------Equivalent.

Introductory Logic -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | T | T F F F T | T F F F T T T | -----------------------------------------------------| T | F | F | F T F F T | F T F T F T T | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | T | T F T F F | T T T F T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T T F F | F T T T F T F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | T | T F F F F | T F F F T F F | -----------------------------------------------------| F | F | F | F T F F F | F T F T F T F | -----------------------------------------------------Equivalent 9. &E P P DD 1. 2. | J | 6. &E 2. 1. W: The Pirates will win the pennant. therefore G -----------------------------------------------------~(W w ~N) | G | | G | N | W | W ø (N ÷ G) | -----------------------------------------------------| F | T | F | F T T F F | T F F FT | F | -----------------------------------------------------Invalid. | G & J | ----------------1. Chapter 4 Exercises 4-2: 1. N: The Pirates will get a new manager. &I A & (B w C) SHOW B w C -------------3. 7. a. 1. I & J 3. 2. P & (Q ÷ R) P (Q w R) & R P SHOW [P & (Q w R)] & R DD ---------------------| P | 1. ~(W w ~N). G: The pirates will get a good manager. 3. G & H 2. W ø (N ÷ G). 3. &E 288 . c. &E 4. 5. | B w C | -------------- 5. SHOW G & J ----------------4. can be derived with two uses) P DD 1. 4. (b. | G | 5.

| F | 9. | | | | 1. 13. P W & (T ÷ V) ~X P X w (V ÷ T) P SHOW T ø V DD ------------------------| 1. | C ø D | 6. a. 8. F ø G 2. 6. øE 8. &E &E 6. wI P P P DD 2. 2. d. 289 . 6. 4. &E 5. &I 11. 1 &E 5. ÷E 3. | A | 8. H w G 4. SHOW D & (A & ~P) -------------------------4. b. &E &E 5. | V ÷ T 7. SHOW R w S --------------------5. 2. | A | 7. 5. 4. 2. &I &E 7. 6. 3. | R w S | --------------------1. 3. | D & (A & ~P) | -------------------------1. 5. | F & I | --------------------1. | D | 7. | I | 6. &E 5. | T ÷ V | 2. 3. &I 9. | G | 8. &I 1. 2. wE 6. 7. 6. wE 7. 1. | Q | 6. 4. A ÷ R 4. øI ------------------------1. b 2. 2. | R | 9. ~H & I 3. 6. SHOW F & I --------------------5. øE &E &E 8. C & ~P 3. A & (C ø D) 2. | ~P | 9. | A & ~P | 10. 7. | ~H | 7. &I 9. ÷E 7. 4. 7. 1. (A & R) & G R ÷ (M & S) S w Q -SHOW Q w S -----------------P P P DD 15. g a. e. 1. P P P DD P P DD 2. 3. P & Q 2. 2.Q w R | | P & (Q w R) R | [P & (Q w R)] & R | ---------------------Exercise 4-3 5. 3. | T ø V | 5. | C | 5. Q ÷ A 3. f.

&I 5. 7. SHOW ------------------------3. !I P CD ACD CD ACD DD 3. 6. || | N | | | || ----------------------. || B | | | | 6. | | | | | A & R | R | M & S | S | Q w S | -----------------1.| ------------------------- P CD ACD DD 1.Introductory Logic 5.| | | -------------------------. || | M ÷ N 9. 5. 5. 1. 4. L ÷ (M ÷ N) 2. wI P P CD ACD DD 1. | SHOW F & ~I | | ----------------------. 7. | | ~I || 8. 1. 8. 7. ÷E 7. 6. || L | | N | | 6. wE 2. 7. B w C ~C ÷ (A w B) 2.| ------------------------3. | SHOW A w B | | ---------------------. | ~C | 4. 1. | | F & ~I || | ---------------------. ÷E 1. 5. | SHOW L ÷ N | | -------------------------.| 5. 8. || | M | | | | | | 8.| | | S & ~S | | | | S | | | | ~S | | | | ! | | P ID AID DD 1. 5. SHOW (L ÷ M) ÷ (L ÷ N) ----------------------------3.| ----------------------------1. 4. 5. &E &E 6. 9.| | 7. ÷E 7. H & ~I ~G ÷ (F & ~I) 3. 5. R w (S & ~S) SHOW R -------------------| ~R | | SHOW ! | | ---------------. 2. ÷E &E wI Exercise 4-4 1.| 6. 8. || SHOW || ---------------------. | | F || 7. 290 .| 5. wE 5. 6. 2. &E 6. | ~G | 5. F w G 2. || A w B | ---------------------. 3. | L ÷ M | 4. 8. SHOW ------------------------4. 3 wE &E &E 7. 3.

7. 3. | SHOW V | ID | -------------------------. ~S & ~T 3. it can't be used here. 4. 7. only P could be. 5. 5.| ---------------------------- 11. | | S w T | | 7.| 5. &I Exercise 4-6 1. 2. ÷E requires two earlier lines. 7. 8.| ------------------------------ Exercise 4-5 1.| | 7. | ~P | | 5. Wrong form for wE. 4. | T | ACD 4. it can't be used here. Justification should be 1. | | ~V | | AID 6. 5.| ---------------. 2. SHOW T ÷ V CD ----------------------------3. wE 8.| -------------------- 9. ~T w V 2. ÷E | | ! | | 3. | SHOW Q | P P ID AID DD 1. ~P ÷ (S w T) 2. 2. 1.| | | -------------------------. 3. | | | ~T | | | 1. you'd need ~Q. | SHOW ! | -------------------. you'd need ~~P. !I P CD ACD ID 291 . P ~P ÷ P SHOW P ID ---------------------------| ~P | AID ! | DD | SHOW | -----------------------. | | ! | | | -------------------. 2. wE requires two earlier lines. 5. SHOW P -----------------------4. !I | -----------------------. 1. | | SHOW ! | | DD | | ---------------------. 6. | | | ! | | | 3.| | | P | | 1.| -----------------------3. ÷E &E 7. | P | 4. | | ~S | | 8. 6. 6. P 1.| 6. 3. The "SHOW" on his line cannot be canceled until those on lines 6 and 4 are. | | ~T | | 10. 3. 8. SHOW P ÷ Q -----------------------3. Q cannot be assumed here. | | T | | 9. ~P w Q 2. Wrong form for wE. !I | | ---------------------. wE &E 9. 10. 1.

| | | | | ~~P | | | AID | | | DD | | | SHOW ! | | | ----------. !I | -----------------. 17.| | 9. P 2. 15.| | | ------------------| -----------------------5. | | ! | | | -------------------. | SHOW ! | -------------------.|| | | | | | | | ~P ||| | | AID | | | | | SHOW ! ||| | | DD | | | | | ----. | | SHOW ! | | | | --------------. 3. !I | | | ----------.| | | 8. 12. AID DD 1. 13.| | | | Q | | 3.| | 7.| | | | | | | SHOW P || | | ID | | | | -------. | ~~~P | | 4. 9. 6. 1. SHOW ~~P -----------------------3. 7. 16. 17 18. wE | | R | | 2. | | | ~P | | | 8. wE 3. | | | ~~P | | | 7. 8. 14. 11. | | | | ! | | | | | | | -----------. 5.||| | | | | | | | | ! |||| | | 8. 16. | | ~Q | | 6. 14.| | | | | ---------------. 7. 5. 4.| ---------------------- 292 . | | SHOW ~P | | | | ---------------. | | | ! | | | | | --------------. !I | | | | | ----.Introductory Logic | ------------------| 5. 11.|| | | | | | | R || | | 1.| | 6. 1.||| | | | | | | -------. 7. | | | SHOW ! | | | | | | -----------.| | | SHOW ~P | | ID | | -------------. 10. ÷E | | ! | | 5. 10. 6. 2. ÷E | | | | ! || | | 5.| | | | | -------------. !I P P ÷ R Q ÷ R P P w Q P SHOW R ID ---------------------| ~R | AID | DD | SHOW ! | -----------------.| 5. !I 1. 5.| -----------------------7. !I P ID AID DD ID AID DD 3.

| SHOW ! | ------------------. ~P 2. SHOW P ÷ Q ----------------------3.| | | | | -------------. | | | ~~A | | | 7. p ID AID DD ID AID DD ID AID 6. 11. 1. 10. 4.| | | 8. vE | | | | M | | | | 3. !I 13. | | B w A | | 16.| | 7.| 5. -->E | | | | ! | | | | 5. 9. 3. !I 11.| | | ------------------. 6.| ----------------------1.| | 6. 13. P CD ACD ID AID DD 1. | | | | | SHOW !| | | | | | | | | | --.| | | | 9. | | | | SHOW A | | | | | | | | ------.| 5.| | | | | --------------. 8. | | | SHOW ! | | | | | | ----------. 14. !I 8. !I 293 . 13. A w B B w A 2. 11.| | | | 12. | | | ! | | | | | --------------.| | | | M | | 2.| | | | | 11. | SHOW Q | | ------------------. | | | | | ~A | | | | | 10. | P | 4. 10.| ----------------------1.| | | | | | | H | | | | 1. wI 3. 12. | | SHOW ! | | --------------. wE 14. 9.9. | | ! | | | ------------------.| | 14. | | SHOW ~A | | | | --------------. | | | | ! | | | | | | | ----------. 2. !I 1. 12. | | | | B w A | | | | 13. SHOW ----------------------3. | ~(B w A) | | 4. P B w H B ÷ M P H ÷ M P SHOW M ID ---------------------| ~M | AID | -SHOW ! | DD | -----------------. 5.| | | | | | | | | ------. | | B | | 15. 3. | | ~Q | | | | 6. 5. -->E | | ! | | 5. !I | | | ---------.| | | | | ~B | | | AID | | | -SHOW ! | | | DD | | | ---------. 7. 15.| | | -SHOW B | | ID | | -------------. 7. wI 3. | | | | | | ! | | | | | | | | | | | --. 8.

3. 4. 2. | R ÷ S | 6. 6. | ~N | 2. P P P P DD 3.| -------------------------P ÷ (D v Y) R w P ~R & (D ÷ Q) Y ÷ Q -SHOW Q ------------------------| ~R | | P | | D w Y | | D ÷ Q | | Q | ------------------------P P P DD 1. 4. 3. 2. &E 1. øI P P CD ACD DD 2.| | | ~M | | | | R | | | ---------------------. Q & ~N P DD 3. HS 3. 7. but not using MT) 3. 4. 11. R ÷ I I ÷ S S ÷ R SHOW S ø R --------------------------5. 2. 9. 6. 5. 8. (T w R) ÷ N P 2. 9. 2. 5. 6. &E 5. 5. 4. | ~(T w R) | 1. 1. d 5. 7. 9. 1. ÷E 3. 8. 10. 3. &E 4. SC 294 . w 1. 1. a (Note: D and ~C could be inferred. MT --------------------------1.Introductory Logic | -----------------. SHOW ~(T w R) --------------------------4. wE 7.| ---------------------- Chapter 5: EXERCISES 5-1 1. | S ø R | --------------------------R w M W & ~M SHOW F ÷ R -------------------------| F | | SHOW R | | ---------------------. 6. 7. &E 2.

| Q ÷ X | 4.| | | 8. | ~K | --------------------------- P P DD 2. | | | Q | | | | | -----------------. | | Q | | | | 5. | | | | ! | | | | | | | ---------. 4. | | ! | | | -----------------. 1. Q ø X 2. | | SHOW X | | -----------------. SHOW (Q ÷ X) & (X ÷ Q) -------------------------3. &I P DD 1. | Q ø X | --------------------------3.| ---------------------1.| 7. øE CD ACD DD 1. 1. &E 1. wI 3.| 8. SHOW ~K --------------------------4. | | | | ~P w Q | | | | 9. 5. øE 3. | | | X | | | | | -----------------. | | X | | 9. !I 1. ~P w Q SHOW P ÷ Q P ID AID DD ID AID DD P DD CD ACD DD 1. 2. 4. | | SHOW P | | | | -------------.| | | ---------------------. !I P CD 295 . 11. 4. 8. 7. | SHOW X ÷ Q | | ---------------------.| 11.| | 10. | SHOW ! | -----------------. MT Exercises 5-2 1. &E 3. K ÷ S 2. | | | ~P | | | | | | 7. | | SHOW Q | | | | -----------------. SHOW ~P w Q ---------------------| 3. &E 1. | | | SHOW ! | | | ---------. | SHOW Q ÷ X | | ---------------------.| 5. | ~S | 5.13. 1.| 4.| | | | | -------------. P & ~S 3. wI 3. | ~(~P w Q) | 4. ÷E 10.| | 6.| | 10. SHOW Q ø X --------------------------3. | | ~P w Q | | 12. P ÷ Q 2. | (Q ÷ X) & (X ÷ Q) | -------------------------1.| | 6. øI 6. 8. | X ÷ Q | 5. | | Q | | 11. (Q ÷ X) & (X ÷ Q) 2.| | | ---------------------.

wI 1. 3. | | | P w Q | | | | | -------------. SHOW P w Q ---------------------3.| | | | | 10.| | | | | 6. SC P CD 296 .| | | -----------------. | SHOW Q ÷ (Q w P) | -----------------. Q w P 2. | Q w P | ---------------------1. | | P | | 9.| | 7.| 11.| 5. SC P DD CD ACD DD 4. 7. SHOW ~U ÷ ~Z ACD ID AID DD 1. | | SHOW ! | | | | -------------. | | SHOW Q w P | | | | -------------.| | | -----------------. | P w Q | ---------------------7.| | 6.| 8. | SHOW P ÷ (P w Q) | | -----------------. | | SHOW P w Q | | | | -------------. | SHOW P ÷ (Q w P) | | -----------------. !I P DD CD ACD DD 4. | | P | | 5. Z ÷ U 2. | SHOW Q ÷ (P w Q) | | -----------------. |P | 4. 5. | | Q | | | | 5.| | | -----------------. 7.| | | -----------------. | | SHOW P w Q | | -------------. | SHOW Q | | -----------------.| ---------------------5. | | ~Q | | 6.Introductory Logic ---------------------3.| | | -----------------. wI 1. | | SHOW Q w P | | | | -------------. wI CD ACD DD 8.| 8. 1.| 11. 1. | | | Q w P | | -------------. 3. | | | ~P | | | 8. | | | P w Q | | -------------.| 4. SHOW Q w P ---------------------3. | | | ! | | | | | -------------. wI CD ACD DD 8. wE 3. P w Q 2. 7. | | Q | | 9.| | 10. | | | Q w P | | | | | -------------.| | 7.| 7.| 4.

| ~~P | 7. | | ~U | | | | 6. | SHOW ~Z | DD | -------------------. 3. &E | ~A | 2. 1. 7. P w ~L P 2. 5. &E | R | 3. øE | H ÷ A | 1.| -----------------------1. 6. ÷E 3.| 5. 3. 5. ÷E | A | 5. MT 10. | | | ! | | | | | -------------. | | SHOW ! | | -------------. wE 8. R ÷ (H ÷ A) P ~A ø H P H & R P SHOW ! DD ----------------------| H | 3. | P | 1. 5. 8. &E 5. &E 5. !I ----------------------- Exercises 5-3 1. 4. ÷E &E &E 9. | SHOW U | | -----------------. P ÷ (Q & R) ~R & Q Q ÷ P SHOW ! ----------------------| Q | | P | | Q & R | | R | | ~R | | ! | ----------------------P CD ACD ID AID DD 1. &E 7. 7. !I 1.| | | -----------------.| ---------------------9. 8.| | 7. 2. 9. 9. &I ------------------------ 297 . 9. | ~~L | 4. DN 6. 2. 8.-----------------------3. | L | 2. ~U ÷ ~Z 2. !I P P P DD 2. 4. SHOW Z ÷ U ---------------------3. L & (Z ÷ ~P) P DD 3. 6. 5. | ~~L & ~Z | 5. | | ~Z | | 1. SHOW ~~L & ~Z -----------------------4. 11. 8. | ~Z | 6. 8. 3. 2. 10. | Z | 4. 3. 10. 5.| 5. 7. ÷E | ! | 7. | | | ~Z | | | 8. ÷E 6. | ~U | ACD 4. | Z ÷ ~P | 2. MT | -------------------. 7. 6. 1. 1. DN 9. 9.

3. S ÷ (A ø N) Q w (~A ø N) ~Q & (~S ÷ T) SHOW T -----------------------| ~Q | | ~A ø N | | ~(A ø N) | | ~S | | ~S ÷ T | | T | -----------------------P P DD 2. &E 2.Introductory Logic 3. 8. wE 6. | H | ----------------------1. 2. | ~T | | 10. | A w (C w B) | | 4. 5. | ~(H w T) | 7. | G ÷ (P & Q) | 5. HS 5. 5. 4. 6. &E 2. | Q | 12. ÷E P P DD 2. | ~T | 6. Com 3. 6. 4. (P & Q) ÷ (H w X) 2. | T w Q 11. | C & ~T | 5. 9. wE P P P DD 3. SHOW H ----------------------4. A w (B w C) 2. 10. &I 5. | ~H | 9. 1. P P DD 1. (H w T) ÷ ~S 2. 3. | (C w A) w B | ----------------------1. 9. 8. ~(C ÷ T) 2. 4. 1. | ~~S | 6. 2. 7. MT DeM &E &E &E 10. Com 1. MT 3 &E 8. 298 . G ÷ (Q & P) 3. | G ÷ (X w H) -----------------------1. 7. ~ ø 1. Com P P P DD &E DN 5. H w T 3. 7. 1. | G ÷ (H w X) | | 6. 4. Com P DD 1. 13. | S | 5. S & (T w Q) 3. B w (~J & W) (J w W) & (J w H) (W & H) ÷ B SHOW B ------------------------ 11. Assoc. SHOW ~H & Q ---------------------4. 5. SHOW (C w A) w B ----------------------3. | ~H & Q | ---------------------1. | (A w C) w B 5. wE 11. SHOW G ÷ (X w H) -----------------------4. 9. 2. 4. | ~H & ~T | 8. 7. 7. 9. ~ ÷ 4.

wE | | ---------------. wI 10. | (E w ~L) w H | | 6. | CD 6. | | | ~(E w ~X) | | | 7.5. ~I ÷ ~(E w ~X) 2. | J w (W & H) | 2. | (~L w E) w H | 5. | SHOW J ÷ B | -------------------. ÷w 17.| | 299 . SHOW ~Q DD ------------------------5. | I w X | -----------------------P DD CD ACD DD 1. SHOW ~E ÷ (~L w H) ---------------------------3. | | SHOW X | | | | ---------------. 11. | ~R ÷ ~Q | 6. | | SHOW M | | DD | | -----------------------------. ~R w S P 3. 6. SC -----------------------15. 4. 4. 6. Dist.| | 9. | | ~I | | 5. | E w (~L w H) 7. 8. | | | ~(~J & W) | | | 10. | | | X | | | | | ---------------. | SHOW ~I ÷ X | -------------------. | B | 3. L ÷ (E w H) 2. 1. SHOW (A ÷ M) w (B ÷ ~M) DD -------------------------------------| CD 2. DN | | | 9. | | | ~E & ~~X | | | 8. | | | ~E & X | | | 9. | | M | | ACD 4. | | J | | ACD 8. P & (S ÷ ~Q) P 4. | ~Q | 2. | P | 3.| 4. 1. 5. 3.| 13.| | 6. 1.| 3. 1. 8. Ctr 8. ÷w Assoc Com Assoc ÷w 3. | | | B | | | 1. 6. ÷E 7. | S ÷ ~Q | 3 &E 9. | SHOW M ÷ M | ---------------------------------. P ÷ (Q ÷ R) P 2. | Q ÷ R | 1. DeM 12. 5.| 7. 7. | | | ~~J | | | 7. | | | ~~J w ~W 11.| | | -------------------. SHOW I w X -----------------------| 3. | ~L w (E w H) | 4. ÷E DeM DN &E 3. 5. 7. &E 6.| 10. | ~E ÷ (~L w H) | ---------------------------P DD 1. SC ------------------------- Exercises 5-4 1. | | SHOW B | | DD | | ---------------.| | | -------------------.

| | | | SHOW R | | | | DD | | | | ----------.| | | | | | CD 12. | | | SHOW ~T ÷ R | | | --------------.| | | | 11. Assoc. | (A ÷ M) w (B ÷ ~M) | 13.| | | | 300 . | R w ~T 5. | M w ~M | 6. 2. 12. 11. 4. 9. 13. 10. P Q ÷ S Q w T P P T ÷ (Q w S) SHOW (S & T) w (S & Q) DD ----------------------| SHOW S | ID | ------------------. | | | | ~T | | | | ACD | | | | DD 14. 13. Com | (S & T) w (S & Q) | 14. 6. 14. | | | M | | | 3. Com | 7. Assoc. | ~M w M | 2. | | SHOW R | | DD | | ------------------. 10. 10. | (~A w M) w ~M | 8.Introductory Logic 5. | | | | R | | | | ACD 10. 11. ÷E | | | S | | | 8. 8.| | S & (Q w T) | 2. | 12. (P ÷ Q) ÷ R P 2. 5. | [(A ÷ M) w ~M] w ~B | 10. | | | | SHOW R | | | | -----------. 5.| 6. 1. ÷w 11. ÷w -------------------------------------5. | | | SHOW R ÷ R | | | --------------. ÷w 7. | (A ÷ M) w (~M w ~B) | 11. (S ÷ ~Q) ÷ T P 3.| | | ---------------------------------. | | | | |R | | | | | 9.| | | 13.| | | 9. 3. | (A ÷ M) w ~M | 9. wE | | | Q w S | | | 3. Com. 7. MT | | | T | | | 2.| | | ~S | | AID | | SHOW ! | | DD | | --------------. 9. wI 12. | SHOW S ÷ R | CD | ----------------------. Dist ----------------------- 1. 8. !I | | --------------. | (A ÷ M) w (~B w ~M) 14. | ~A w (M w ~M) 9.R | | -----------------------------. 15. 6. SHOW (R w ~T) ÷ (S ÷ R) CD --------------------------| ACD 4. wI 8.| | | | | ~Q | | | 1.| | | | | | | -------------.| 6. 7. &I | S & (T w Q) | 13.| | | | | CD 8. R | | | | ----------. | | S | | ACD 7. wE | | | ! | | | 6.| | | ------------------.

÷v 1. &I. | ~K w (N & F ) 4. ÷w 1. 16. 6.| | F & G | ----------------------- DD CD ACD DD 1. &E 17. øE 5. 3. 4.| | | | | F | | | | | | F & G | | | | | --------------. CD ACD DD 1. 18. SC 9. 8. | (~K w N) & (~K w F) | 5. 7. ÷w 3. 9. ÷w 5. 10. 13. | ~P w Q | 301 . 11. 5. 20. 20. K ÷ (N & F) 2.| | | SHOW G ÷ (F & G) | ------------------. SHOW (K ÷ N) & (K ÷ F) -------------------------| 3. Com 13.| | | ------------------. (P ÷ Q) ÷ (S & T) ~S Q w ~P SHOW ! -------------------------5. Dist 4. 2. 2.| | ----------------------. wI 19. ~ ÷ 16. DN 18. 8. 9. øE 10. | | | 1. SC P DD 1.| | | F | | | | SHOW F & G | | | | --------------. 21. | (K ÷ N) & (~K w F) | 6. 14. 7. 12.| --------------------------| | | | | | | | | | | P P 2. &I. 13. 2. 3. 4. 4.| | | ------------------. ÷E 4. P (K ÷ N) & (K ÷ F) SHOW K ÷ (N & F) DD -------------------------| (K ÷ N) & (~K w F) | 1. | | | | | | | | | 22. 1.| | | |R | | | ------------------. | (K ÷ N) & (K ÷ F) | -------------------------1. 4. 12. 19. F ø G F w G SHOW F & G ---------------------| | SHOW F ÷ (F & G) | ------------------. 2. 5. 11. ÷v | 3. Dist | 5. | | | ~(S ÷ ~Q) || | | | | | | S & ~~Q || | | | | | | ~~Q || | | | | | | Q || | | | | | | ~P w Q || | | | | | |P ÷ Q || | | | | | | R || | | | | | -----------. ÷v | K ÷ (N & F) -------------------------P P P DD 3. 10. MT 15. 12. 3.| | | | | -------------.| | | G | | | | SHOW F & G | | | | --------------.| | | | | G | | | | | | F & G | | | | | --------------. 17. ÷v | (~K w N) & (~K w F) | ~K w (N & F ) | 4. 6.15. 5.

either B or C. 7. and also that either A or B. "z" not a name. 4. ÷v 1. !I A w ~B B w A SHOW A -------------------------| ~A | | SHOW ! | | ---------------------. Hence B is true. We will use an indirect proof. that A or not-B. 4. But from this and the first premise. 8. Since we are given that can infer that either B or C. 8. 7. wE We are given that that C is false. 5. QED. 6. 11. 7. 2. 9. 9. Sentence Not a sentence. it follows that not-B. 8.| -------------------------- We are given that either A or not B. we given that P P DD 1. So a contradiction follows from our assumption. and we are also given SHOW B. &E 2. 2. | | | | P ÷ Q | S & T | S | ! | -------------------------5. We want to SHOW that A. And C is false. it follows that B. QED. B must be true. We first assume that not-A. If Alice is on the lacrosse team then Donald is on the softball team and Benjamin is on the field hockey team. 6. both A and either Since we are also 3. 3. 7.| | | ~B | | | | B | | | | ! | | | ---------------------. | B | --------------------------1. Chapter 6: Exercises 6-1 1. 302 . ÷E 7. 3. she's on the softball team.Introductory Logic 6. 4. 1. 5. 4. both A and We want to B or C. If Carol is not on the field hockey team. not-B. 3. !I Exercises 5-5 1. wE 6. &E. But from our assumption and the second premise. which must therefore be false. that A or B. | B w C | 5. 13. wE 2. Sentence Sentence Donald is on the lacrosse team and Benjamin is on the baseball team. P P ID AID DD 1. 2. A & (B w C) ~C SHOW B --------------------------4.

19. c 7. a. T 11. All dogs.) 11. Nothing (assuming nothing is both a dog and a wolf. a. T 17. (no animal satisfies the antecedent. 23. œv(Lv w Pv) 15. 2. 3. 2 11. œx(Kx ÷ (Dx & ~Bx)) 7. 1. œw(Lw ÷ [Mw w Pw]) 13. non-mammals and dogs. F 7.) 5. 5. 9. T 9. T 3. Tt 21. All animals. Wolves. c 9. 7. a 3. 2 Exercises 6-4 1. 15. T 19.Exercises 6-2 1. 11. all animals. 1. 21. œx(Vx ÷ Sx) ÷ ~œx(Vx ÷ Bx) 5. œx[~(Mx w Lx) ÷ Px] 17. œz[(Tz &Tt) ÷ ~Cz] 23. 7. 17. œz(Mz ÷ Lz) 11. œy[Cy ÷ Ny] 19. 13. 9. 1 15. T 5. œy[(Ey w Ky) ÷ Dy] 9. 3 13. 1. T 23. T 15. such a creature would satisfy this open sentence. c 5. T 21. Exercises 6-3 1. œw[Nw ÷ (Cw w Tw)] Exercises 6-6 1. if you classify the result of breeding a dog with a wolf as both a dog and a wolf. T 13. F Exercises 6-5 1. ›xCx ›z(Fz & Jz) ›v(~Rv & Cv) ›y(Jy & Ry)& ~ ›y(Cy & Ry) ›w(Aw & Cw) ›x(Ax & Bx) & ~ ›x(Bx & Cx) ~›z~Az ›v[Av & ~(Bv w Cv)] ›yOy ›w(Ow & Qw)÷ ›xPx ~›x(Ox & Px) ø ›x(Qx & Ox) Qb ÷ ~›z(Pz & Oz) 303 . 3. b. œx(Vx ÷ Sx) 3.

œx(Bx ÷ Hx) œz[(Hz & Jz) ÷ ~Pz] œv(~~Hv ÷ ~Pv) œy[(Wy & ~Hy) ÷ ~(Jy w By)] ›w[(Bw & ~Hw) & ~Pw] ›x(Sx & ~Hx) & œx(Bx ÷ ~~Hx) œz[Ez ÷ (Lz w Yz)] œv(~Ev ÷ ~Lv) œy[~Yy ÷ ~~(Ey w Ly)] œw[Mw ÷ (Aw & Tw)] ›x(Ax & Tx) œz[(Az & Mz) ÷ Tz] Exercises 6-8 1. 11. 19. 15. Every respected physicist who is completely credible on the subject of aliens neither claims to have been abducted by aliens in a flying saucer nor believes that aliens regularly visit the earth in flying saucers. then no respected physicist claims to have been abducted by aliens in flying saucers. 15. œx(Fx ÷ Mx) & œx(Sx ÷ Wx) 3.Introductory Logic Exercises 6-7 1. If everyone who is completely credible on the subject of aliens does not believe that aliens regularly visit the earth in flying saucers. œy(Fx ÷ Mx) & [›x(Mx & Gx) & ›y(Wy & Gy)] 9. Not everyone one who believes that aliens regularly visit earth in flying saucers fails to be completely credible on the subject of aliens. 13. 5. 304 . œz[([Mz & Lz] & Fz) ÷ ~Gz] 5. 17. 7. 3. 9. No respected physicist believes that aliens regularly visit earth in flying saucers. 23. [›v(Mv & Lv) & ›v(Wv & Lv)] & [( ›v[Mv & Gv] & ›v[Wv & Gv]) & ~›v([Mv & Sv] w [Wv & Fv])] 7. 11. 21. 13.

›x( [(Sax & ›y(Pyx & Pyg)) & Fg] w [(Sxg & ›y(Pyx & Pya)) & Fg]) &~Sag 17. ›v[Ma & (Pav & Pve)] 13. 23. ~›x[(Tx & ›y(My & Bgyx)] Exercises 7-3 1. 11. 15.Chapter 7: Exercises 7-1 1. ›x(Fx & Bexb) 27. 25.4: 305 .[Note: NOT Alonzo and Gertrude are both in the same writing class as someone. 17. œx(Tax ÷ Lax) 7. 7. 23. 19. No professor despises every student he or she teaches. 21. 31. 19. 7. ›xOax & ~Oag ›x(Ogx & ~Lgx) œx(Rax ÷ Lax) ›x(Rax & Lax) & ~ ›x(Rgx & Lgx) Bcad (Gcb & Gca) & ~Gcd (Gab w Gcb) & ~(Gab & Gcb) Gca ÷ ~Rcbbd ›yGyd œz(Gzc ÷ Gzb) œw[(Gwa & Lwc) ÷ Rwadw] (Lab & Lbd) ø Bbad Alonzo is in the same writing class as Gertrude. ›z(Taz & Laz) & ~ ›z(Tgz & Lgz) 9. Alonzo is in the same writing class as everyone who lives in the same dorm as Gertrude. ›x[(Fx & Sax) & ›y(Pyg & Pyx)] & ~Sag 15. ›w(Ma & Paw) & ›w(Fg & Pgw) 11. T T T F F T F T T T T F Exercises 7. 3. 5. Every professor teaches someone. 21. Gertrude is in the same writing class as someone who is in the same writing class as Alonzo. 5. 25. (Why not?)] 29. ›y(Ogy & ~Lgy) 5. 21. 9. ›xOax & ~Oag 3. 3. 17. ›x›y›z›w[((Cx & Pz) & (Ty & Tw)) & ((Bgxy & Bzxw) & Lyw)] 31. Every professor is despised by some student. 9. Alonzo is in the same writing class as someone and Gertrude is in the same writing class as someone. 19. 27. 13. 23. Every student admires some professor or other. 13. 15. ›x[›y›z([Tx & (Fy & Pz)] & Bzyx) & ›y(My & Bgyx)] 29. Exercises 7-2 1. 11.

something not M. 17. 3. 3. but nothing may be both F and G. It must either have something that is R and E or something that is D and E. You interpretation must have nothing that is A. 7. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. 19. and something that is not F. Something must be neither B nor C. Chapter 8: Exercises 8-1 1. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. There must be something that is F but not G. Either something must not be M and something must be H and something not H. 13. 11. 21. Nothing may be C. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain.Introductory Logic 1. You interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. and nothing H. You interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. 5. or something must be M. œx(Rx ÷ Sxg) ~œx(Rx ÷ Sxg) œx(Rx ÷ ~›ySxy) ›yœx(Rx ÷ ~Sxy) ~œx(Rx ÷ ›ySxy) ›y~œx(Rx ÷Sxy) ~›x›y(Rx & Sxy) 7. 15. Nothing may be F. The things named “a” and “b” must be distinct and one must be G and one not. At least one thing must be F. At least one must be F and at least one must be G. At least one thing must be B and everything that is B must be C. and something else must be G but not F. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. Your interpretation must have nothing that is A but at least one thing that is C. 5. Your interpretation must have at least one thing that is either D but not E or E but not D. Your interpretation must have nothing that is F. Something must be B and something must not be B. 306 . 9. At least one thing must not be G.

it either H’s or J’s it. Nothing may J everything. Your interpretation must have somethings that are F. You interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. Every C must D something. Your domain must have an infinite number of things in it. Using confinement the sentences become: œxFx w ›yGy. Something must H nothing. Either there must be a C that doesn’t D itself or there must be two Cs. 3. 13. there must be at least two. (For instance. Your interpretation must have a thing named “a” which is neither R nor P nor T and must not V itself. Bj & ›xPx. and every B must either D everything but not be D’ed by everything. If one thing S’s a second. 9. the second must S the first. or must be D’ed by everything but not D everything. It must make whatever is named "a" G and must make something F and something not F. Exercises 8-3 1. There must be at least one thing which is B. 3. 5. one of which does not D the other. œxBx ÷ Pj Your interpretation must have some- 307 . 7. ›z~Fz Your interpretation must have at least two members in its domain. W must be a transitive relation that everything has to something. and something must neither S nor be S’ed by a. If there are any B’s.Exercises 8-2: 1. Something must be such that no matter what thing you pick. and every F must K some. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. Using confinement the sentences become: ~Pj w ›xBx. and there must be nothing that W’s something that W’s it. 11. Your interpretation must have at least two things in it. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. your domain may be the positive integers and a thing may W another if and only if it is less than that other). Anything that is R or P or T must V itself. Ga & ›yFy. There must be at least one C. Something must S and be S’ed by a. but not all of them.

Fa ÷ Gra Fcc ø Rccc [Ma w (Faa w Fab)] & [Mb w (Fba w Fbb)] [(Dat ÷ Waa) w (Dat ÷ Wat)] & [(Dtt ÷ Wta) w (Dtt ÷ Wtt)] 9. In your interpretation. 3. Exercises 8-4: 1. the sentences become: œx(œyRxy ÷Mx). Your interpretation must have something that is not C and something that is not M. 7. If anything H's something.) 19. 7. Either the thing named “j” must also be P. Your interpretation must have nothing that H's itself. œx(›yRxy ÷ ›zRzx) Your interpretation must have nothing that is M. 13. 15. There must be something that is both D and L. (Note: there needn't be anything that H's anything. and the thing named “j” must be B. œx~Bx w ~Cc [Note: we used Dem on the last sentence before using confinement. Either something must be B and the thing named “c” not C. Something must H everything. Something must H nothing. You interpretation must have everything Z. Using confinement the sentences become: ~(›x›yAxy ÷ Bc). 17.] Your interpretation must have something that A’s something. c must not be C. something must H it. then something must R it. Your interpretation must have at least two things in its domain. and something that is L but not D. ([(Gaa w Gab) w Gac] & [(Gba w Gbb) w Gbc]) & [(Gca w Gcb) w Gcc] 11. 5. or c must A itself and and if anything is B. œz~Mz & ~Ma. 5. The thing named “c” must not be B. something must be M and either all the Ms must be C or all the Ms must 308 . Nothing may R everything. If anything R’s something.Introductory Logic thing that is P. ›xBx w Acc. Using confinement. Everything that is D must be L. or there must be one thing that is not B.

Chapter 9: Exercises 9-1 1. 1. 5. 4. 1. 8. 5. | œy[(Ja & Ky) ÷ (My & Na)] 5. 2. 5. œE 4. SHOW ]y(Mb & Ny) DD --------------------------------| 1. wE 1. 2. 7. 3. | Mb & Na | 2. 3. 6. The left sentence entails the right. ÷E | 6. 4. 6. œxœy[(Jx & Ky) ÷ (My & Nx)] P 2. 1. 6. œx(Fx w Gx) œx~Gx SHOW Fb ----------------------| Fb w Gb | | ~Gb | | Fb | ----------------------Fa & Ga SHOW ›zGz ------------------| Ga | | ›zGz | ------------------P DD 1. Ja & Kb P 3. 3. ~÷ &E ›I DN 7. 7. œxœy[Nx ÷ (Kx & My)] 3. 5. &E 3. œE 2. ]I P P DD 1. a. | ›y(Mb & Ny) ---------------------------------1.be not C. 4. ›x(Kx & Mx) ÷ œyGy 2. 5. so your interpretation must make the left sentence false and the right true. 21. SHOW Gm --------------------------P P P DD 9. | (Ja & Kb) ÷ (Mb & Na) | 4. 2. e c Exercises 9-2 1. œE 4. 4. ›I 7. œE 6. 309 . Hence something must Q something but not K anything. wE ›xMx w ~›yPy ~(Pq ÷ Mg) SHOW ›xMx --------------------------| Pq & ~Mg | | Pq | | | ›yPy | ~~›yPy | | ›xMx | --------------------------- P P DD 2. 3. 1. Np 4. 3. 5. and everything that Q's everything must K something or other.

| | | | | | œy[Np ÷ (Kp & My)] | 2.| | | Fb ÷ Ga | | | | Fb | | | | Ga | | | ----------------------. ÷E &E &E ›I 10. 6. ÷E 6. SHOW ~œx~Qx 310 . 2. 6. 9. 8. œE Np ÷ (Kp & Mp) | 5. 4. 8. 2. 7. 3. 9. ›I P P DD 1. 6. 5. ÷E ›x(Kx & Mx) | 7. 7. 4. 3. 1. 2. 9. œE -------------------------- Exercises 9-3 1. 4. 4. 7. ›E 3. 2. 1. &I --------------------------| | œxFx | SHOW Ga | | ----------------------. œE Kp & Mp | 3. 1. 6. ›E 3.| --------------------------SHOW ›x(Dx ÷ œyDy) --------------------------| ~Da | | | ~Da w œyDy | Da ÷ œyDy | | ›x(Dx ÷ œyDy) | --------------------------›xQx ›x~Dx 7. 8. P CD ACD DD 1. œE 4. 7. ÷E Gm | 9. 1. 1. 5. 6. ›I P ID 9. 2. 3.Introductory Logic 5. ÷E ›E œE œE SHOW ›zBz --------------------------| Aa | | Aa ÷ Ba | | Ba | | ›zBz | --------------------------›y(Ga & Fy) œxœy[(Gx & Fy) ÷ (Mx & Sy)] SHOW Ma & ›zSz ›yAy --------------------------| Ga &Fb | | œy[(Ga & Gy) ÷ (Ma & Sy)] | | (Ga & Fb) ÷ (Ma & Sb) | | Ma & Sb | | Ma | | Sb | | ›zSz | | Ma & ›zSz | --------------------------›x(Fx ÷ Ga) SHOW œxFx ÷ Ga 6. wI 4. 8. 6. œx(Ax ÷ Bx) P P DD 2. 10. 3. 5. 11. 5. 5. 3. 7. œE 5. ›E 1. 6. P DD 1. 10. 7. 4. 5. ›I œyGy | 1. ÷w 5. 5. 2.

8.| | ~Pa w Ra | | | Pa ÷ Ra | | | | | ~Da ÷ ~Ra | Ra ÷ Da | | 311 . 2. œE 5. 5. 4. 4. œE 5.| | 7.3. ›E 3. ›E 8. œE 2. 9. | | SHOW Fa | | ------------------. 3. ÷E 7. œx(~Px w Rx) œx(~Dx ÷ ~Rx) SHOW œx(Px ÷ Dx) P P UD DD 1.| | | Qa | | | | ~Qa | | | | ! | | | ----------------------. 5. | | | Fa ø Ga | | | 8. 1. | | Pa | | | | 6.| | | | | Aa ÷ Ba | | Ba ÷ Ca | | | | Aa ÷ Ca | | | ----------------------. 4. ÷E 7. HS --------------------------| SHOW Aa ÷ Ca | | ----------------------. --------------------------| | œx~Qx | SHOW ! | | ----------------------. | | | Fa | | | | | ------------------.| | | ----------------------. œE 4. 5. œE 5. ›I --------------------------| Fa & Mb | | | œy[(Fa & Mb) ÷ ›wBw] | (Fa & Mb) ÷ ›wBw | | ›wBw | | Bc | | ›zBz | --------------------------- Exercise 9-4 1. 7.| --------------------------›x(Fa & Mx) œxœy[(Fx & My) ÷ ›wBw] SHOW ›zBz AID DD 1. 8. 7. 6.| --------------------------5. !I 11. 9. Ctr | | | | | | --------------------------| SHOW Pa ÷ Da ----------------------. P P UD CD ACD DD 1. 6. 4. ›E 2. | | | Ga | | | 10.| --------------------------œx(Fx ø Gx) œy(Py ÷ Gy) SHOW œx(Px ÷ Fx) 3. 1. 5. 3. 6. 8. 2. 7. | | | Pa ÷ Ga | | | 9. P P DD 1. 6.| 5. øE --------------------------| | SHOW Pa ÷ Fa | ----------------------. œE 5. 6. ÷w 2. 3. 4. 2. 2. 1. 1. œx(Ax ÷ Bx) œx(Bx ÷ Cx) SHOW œx(Ax ÷ Cx) P P UD DD 1. 7. œE 7. œE 5. œE 2. 3. 6. 6.

| | ~(Wa w Ra) | 6. | | | œxRx | | 12.| ------------------------- P 11. 6.| | | Ga | | | | SHOW ! | | | | ----------------. 3. ÷E 1. œE 10. !I ------------------------| | SHOW ~Ga | --------------------.| | | --------------------. 5.| --------------------------6. 14. 4. | | Pa ÷ Da | | | ----------------------. 6. ›I 1. ÷E 11. ÷E 9. 5.| | | | | | | | | | | | | AID DD 5. 12. 9. 10. 12. 7. œE 11. | | | ~Wa & ~Ra | | 8. 13. | | | ~Ra | | 9. SHOW œx(Fx ÷ Ga) UD --------------------------------| SHOW Fb ÷ Ga | | -----------------------------.| | | -----------------------------. 6. | | | Ra | | 13. 8.| | | | | ~Gb | | | | | | œy(Fc ø Gy) | | | | | | Fc ø Ga | | | | | | Fc | | | | | | œy(Fc ø Gy) | | | | | | Fc ø Gb | | | | | | Gb | | | | | | ! | | | | | ----------------. 13. ›xFx ÷ Ga 2. HS 7. 4. P P UD ID AID DD 2. œE 5. 2. œE 8. 11. 10. 1. ›xWx ÷ œxRx 2. ›I 2. œE 8. &E 8. 9. 1. SHOW œx(Wx w Rx) --------------------------4.| | | | | | | | ›xFx | | | Ga | | | | | -------------------------. ›x~Rx ÷ ›xWx P UD 3. CD ACD DD 4. 12. !I 312 . | SHOW Wa w Ra | ID | ----------------------5. 1.Introductory Logic 9. 7. DeM 7.| 7. 8.| | | Fb | | | | SHOW Ga | | | | ------------------------. | | | ›xWx | | 11. øE 7. | | | ›x~Rx | | 10. | | | ! | | | | ------------------. øE 1. | | SHOW ! | | | ------------------. ›E 1. 9.| ---------------------------------œxœy(Fx ø Gy) ›x~Gx -SHOW œx~Gx P 3.

| --------------------------- Exercises 9-5 1.) 5. P 1. 4. "a" already occurs in the derivation. ›y›x(Hy & Fx) P DD 3.| 313 . ÷E 6. | | SHOW Fb | | -------------.| | | DD 6. you would have to use a new name. 9 WRONG You cannot use existential exploitation on line 8 because the existential quantifier is not the main logical operator of line 8. | ›xFx | 2. SHOW ›x›y(Hx & ~Gy) ---------------------4. Fa P DD 3. 4. œE ------------------- 3. the arrow is. œE 8. 4. 6 WRONG Existential Exploitation requires a new name. WRONG Universal Exploitation can't be used on line 4 because the Universal quantifier is not the main logical operator of line 4. WRONG You cannot use Universal Exploitation on line 1 because the universal quantifier is not the maim logical operator of line 1. the "›y" must be the main operator on line 13. The arrow is. ›xFx ÷ œxFx 2.| ----------------------. SHOW Fb ------------------4. ›I 5. | œx(Ha & Fx) | 2. &E | | -------------. 13 WRONG If Existential Introduction is used on line 12. 5. | Fb | 5. | | | Fb | | | 7. WRONG Existential Exploitation can't be used on line 1 because the existential quantifier is not the main logical operator of line 1. The arrow is. WRONG You cannot use Universal Exploitation on line 2 because the universal quantifier is not the main logical operator of line 2. | œxFx | 1.| | 7. (If you could use Existential Exploitation. the tilde is. the existential quantifier is. | SHOW œxFx | UD | -----------------.| | | -----------------. P 1. œxFx ÷ ~›yGy 2. ›E 5. | | | Ha & Fb | | | 4. not “a”.

÷E ------------------------| | SHOW Hb | --------------------. | | | ›yGy || | 14. ›I 314 . WRONG The "&" is not the main operator of line 2. ÷E 11. œE 4. 13. œx[(Fx & Ga) ÷ Hx] œx(Fx & Ga) SHOW œxHx 1. | Ha & Fd | 16. | ~›yGy | 10. ›I 18. 6. | ›y(Cy & Dy) 12. so you cannot use ampersand exploitation on line 2. 1. | ›yDy | ----------------------P P P P DD 1. ›I 3. &E 10. | | SHOW ! | | | | --------------. 5. | œz(Hz ÷ Az) | | 9. | Ab | 7. | ›yAy | 8. &E 13. | Dc | 14.| ------------------------- Exercises 9-6 1. | Ha & ~Gc | 18. 10. ›E 12. 4. P P UD DD 2. !I 4. 7. 16. Ha 5. Aa ÷ ›y(Cy & Dy) 3. 1. ÷E ID AID DD 11. ÷E 8. œE 1. ›yAy ÷ œz(Hz ÷ Az) 4. | ›y(Ha & ~Gy) | | 19. | | Gc | | 12. | | | ! || | | | --------------. | Ha ÷ Aa 10. SHOW ›yDy ----------------------6. 3. œE 5. 1. 7.| | | -----------------15. œE 15. | Aa | | 11. ›E 6.| | 13. | ›x›y(Hx & ~Gy) ---------------------5. ÷E 2.| | | Fb & Ga | | | | (Fb & Ga) ÷ Hb | | | | Hb | | | --------------------. | Ha | 17. WRONG You cannot use UD here because the instance on the next line uses a name that is not new to the derivation (it occurs in both lines 1 and 2).Introductory Logic 9. ›I 9. 9. | Cc & Dc | 13. ›I 3. 5. 6. 6. 2. &I 17. ›xAx 2. | SHOW ~Gc | | -----------------11.

| | ~Ga | | 6. 17. 5. ÷E 10. 14. ÷ E 5. &E 11. | | Fa ÷ ~Ga | | 7. 4. œxœy(Fx ÷ ~Gy) SHOW ~›x(Fx & Gx) P ID --------------------| ›x(Fx & Gx) | AID | SHOW ! | DD | ----------------. 4. 3. 8. | | Ga | | 5.| | | | | -------------------. 1. 1. 13. 2. ›E | | | Fb | | | 3. øE | | ----------------. 10. œE 13. 18.| 5. œE 9. 19. | | œy(Fa ÷ ~Gy) | | 1.| | | | | | | œy(Rb ø Wy) | | | | | | | | Rb ø Wb | | | | | | | | Wb | | | | | | | | Ra | | | | | | | ---------------. øE 6. 3. 11. 12. 2. 6.| --------------------œx›y(Dx ø Fy) P SHOW œxFx ÷ œyDy CD ------------------------| œxFx | ACD | SHOW œyDy | UD | --------------------.| | | | Ra | | | -----------------------. 1. œE 9. œE 7. 8.| ------------------------œxœy(Rx ø Wy) ›x(Rx w Wx) SHOW œzRz 5. 3.| | | --------------------.| | | | | | | | | | | œy(Ra ø Wy) | | | | Ra ø Wb | | | | | | | | Ra | | | | | | | ---------------. 6. | | Fa | | 5. 7. 6.| | | DD | | SHOW Da | | ----------------. 10 øE CD ACD DD 1. ›E 6. P P UD DD 2.| | | | | -------------------.| | | | | ›y(Da ø Fy) | | | 1. 4. !I | ----------------. 10. 7. œE 15. | | Fa & Ga | | 3. 5. œE | | | Da ø Fb | | | 6. 16. œE 8. SC ---------------------------| SHOW Ra | | -----------------------. 2.3. 9.| | | Rb w Wb | | | | SHOW Wb ÷ Ra | | | | -------------------. 15.| | | | | Wb | | | | | | | | | SHOW Ra | | | ---------------.| ---------------------------- 315 . ›E CD ACD DD 1. 12. œE | | | Da | | | 7. &E 7. 17.| | | | | Rb | | | | | | SHOW Ra | | | | | | ---------------. 16. 9. | | ! | | 9. 8. 8.| | | | | | SHOW Rb ÷ Ra | | -------------------. 7.

| | | | | | | | ›xLx | | | SHOW ! | | | | | | -------------------. 9. 3. 1. 5.| | | ~ ›xLx | | | | SHOW œx~Lx | | | | -----------------------. œE 15. 3. !I 2. 10. 1.| | ~›xLx ø œx~Lx | -------------------------------- DD CD ACD UD ID AID DD 6.| | | | | | | -------------------.10. œE 5. ›I 3. 7. øI Exercises 9-7 1.| | ---------------------------. wE P DD 1. 3.| | SHOW œx~Lx ÷ ~›xLx | | ---------------------------. 11.| | | œx~Lx | | | | SHOW ~›xLx | | | | -----------------------. œE 4. 8. 9. 6. 8. ›I 3. 2. 12. ›I CD ACD | | | | | ---------------------------------›y(Pay w Pya) | Pab w Pba | SHOW Pab ÷ ›x›yPxy | -----------------------------.Introductory Logic 9. 16.| | Pab | | 316 .| | | | | | | | | ›xLx | | | | | | | | | | ! | | | | | | | | | ---------------.| | | | | | | Lb | | | | | | | | ~Lb | | | | | | | | ! | | | | | | | -------------------. 8. ›E 11. &E 1. 2. 7. 15. 14. 3. 17.| | | | | -----------------------.16. 6. 4. 2. !I CD ACD ID AID DD 13. 4. 1. 5. 5. 6. SHOW ~›xLx ø œx~Lx -------------------------------| SHOW ~›xLx ÷ œx~Lx | | ---------------------------. 6 ÷E 2. œxœy[Fxy ÷ (Gx w Hy)] Frs & ~Hs SHOW Gr --------------------------|Frs | | œy[Fry ÷ (Gr w Hy)] | | | Frs ÷ (Gr w Hs) | Gr w Hs | | ~Hs | | Gr | --------------------------›x›y(Pxy w Pyx) SHOW ›x›yPxy P P DD 2.| | | ---------------------------. 13.| | | | | | ----------------------. 4.| | | | | SHOW ~La | | | | | | ------------------| | | | | | | La | | | | | | | | SHOW ! | | | | | | | | ---------------. 18.| | | | -------------------------. &E 7. 8.

›I 4. ›I CD ACD DD 11. 5. 14. P P UD DD 1. SC CD SHOW ›xœyFxy ÷ œy›xFxy --------------------------------| ›xœyFxy | ACD | SHOW œy›xFxy | UD | ----------------------------. | SHOW Iaa | DD | --------------------------. ›I 8. 8.| | | 5. œE 2. 13. 10. 6.| | | | | œyFby | | | 2. | | | Lca | | | | | | 9.| | | | | ›yPay | | | | | | | | | ›x›yPxy | | ------------------------. 2. ›E | | | Fba | | | 5. ›E 7.7. 10. œE | | | ›xFxa | | | 6. | | œy(Way ÷ Iaa) | | 1. | | | | ›yLcy | | | | | | | ----------------------. œxœy(Wxy ÷ Ixx) P 2.| | | -----------------------------. 15. 5. 8.| 5. | | Lca w Lcb | | 6. œE CD ACD DD 8.| | | 10. | | Iaa | | 6. | | SHOW Lca ÷ ›yLcy | | | | --------------------------. 7. | | ›yWay | | 2.| | | ›x›yPxy ----------------------------------- DD 6. œx›yWxy P 3. 2.| | | SHOW ›xFxa | | DD | | ------------------------. | | ›yLcy ÷ Hc 7.| ------------------------------1. | | SHOW ›x›yPxy | | | | ------------------------. 3.| | | | | --------------------------. œx(Lxa w Lxb) œx(›yLxy ÷ Hx) SHOW œxHx 9.| | 317 . œE 6. 5.| | | -----------------------------. | | | SHOW ›yLcy | | | ----------------------. œE 9. 9. SHOW œxIxx UD ------------------------------4. | | Wab | | 5. 1.| --------------------------------- 7.| | | | | ›yPby | | | | | | ›x›yPxy | | | | | ------------------------. 3. ›I 13. 4.| | | ----------------------------.| | 8.| | | Pba | | | | SHOW ›x›yPxy | | | | ------------------------. ÷E | --------------------------.| | | SHOW Pba ÷ ›x›yPxy | -----------------------------. 11. 1. 12. ›I | | ------------------------. | | Wab ÷ Iaa | | 7. 4. ›I ----------------------------------| SHOW Hc | | ------------------------------. œE 8.

Introductory Logic

11. | | 12. | 13. | | 14. | | | 15. | 16. | | SHOW Lcb ÷ ›yLcy | | --------------------------- | | | Lcb | | | | SHOW ›yLcy | | | | ----------------------- | | | | | ›yLcy | | | | | ----------------------- | | | --------------------------- | | ›yLcy | | Hc | | ------------------------------- | ----------------------------------| | | | | | | | | | P UD CD ACD DD 12, ›I 5, 7, 11, SC 6, 15, ÷E

11. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 9.

œxœy(Bxy w Byx) SHOW œxBxx

-------------------------| SHOW Baa | ID | ---------------------- | | | ~Baa | | AID | | SHOW ! | | DD | | ------------------ | | | | | | | | œy(Bay w Bya) | | | Baa w Baa | | | | | | Baa | | | | | | ! | | | | | ------------------ | | | ---------------------- | -------------------------œxœyœz[(Cxy & Cyz) ÷ Cxz] œxœy(Cxy ÷ Cyx) SHOWœx(~Cxx ÷ œy~Cxy)

1, 6, 4, 4,

œE œE

7, wE 8, !I

13.1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

P P UD CD ACD UD ID AID DD 2, œE 10, œE 8, 11, ÷E 8, 12, &I 1, œE 14, œE 15, œE 13, 16, ÷E 5, 17, !I

-------------------------------------------| SHOW ~Caa ÷ œy~Cay | | ---------------------------------------- | | | ~Caa | | | | SHOW œy~Cay | | | | ------------------------------------ | | | | | | | | SHOW ~Cab | | | -------------------------------- | | | | | | | Cab | | | | | | | | | | | | SHOW ! | | | | ---------------------------- | | | | | | | | | œy(Cay ÷ Cya) | | | | | | | | | | Cab ÷ Cba | | | | | | | | | | Cba | | | | | | | | | | Cab & Cba | | | | | | | | | | œyœz[(Cay & Cyz) ÷ Caz] | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | œz[(Cab & Cbz) ÷ Caz] | | | | | (Cab & Cba) ÷ Caa | | | | | | | | | | Caa | | | | | | | | | | ! | | | | | | | | | ---------------------------- | | | | | | | | ---------------------------- | | | | | | | -------------------------------- | | | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ---------------------------------------- |

318

-------------------------------------------15. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. SHOW œx›y(Rxy ø Rxx) --------------------------------| SHOW ›y(Ray ø Raa) | | ----------------------------- | | | | | SHOW Raa ÷ Raa | | ------------------------- | | | | | Raa | | | | | | SHOW Raa | | | | | | --------------------- | | | | | | | Raa | | | | | | | --------------------- | | | | | ------------------------- | | | | Raa ø Raa | | | | | | ›y(Ray ø Raa) | ----------------------------- | --------------------------------UD DD CD ACD DD 4, R 3, øI 7, ›I

**Chapter 10 Exercises 10-1 1. ~›x(Ax & ~Bx) P SHOW œx(Ax ÷ Bx) UD --------------------------| CD 3. | SHOW Aa ÷ Ba | ----------------------- | 4. | | Aa | | ACD 5. | | SHOW Ba | | DD | | ------------------- | | 6. | | | œx~(Ax & ~Bx) | | | 1, QN 7. | | | ~(Aa & ~Ba) | | | 6, œE 8. | | | ~~(Aa ÷ Ba) | | | 7, ~ ÷ 9. | | | Aa ÷ Ba | | | 8, DN 10. | | | Ba | | | 4, 9, ÷E | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | --------------------------1. 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9.
**

œx(Ex ÷ Fx) ~›xFx SHOW œx~Ex --------------------------| SHOW ~Em | | ----------------------- | | | Em ÷ Fm | | | | | | œx~Fx | | ~Fm | | | | ~Em | | | ----------------------- | ---------------------------

3.

P P UD DD 1, œE 2, QN 7, œE 5, 8, ÷E

5.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

~›x(Rx & ~Px) ~›x(Jx & Px) SHOW ~›x(Jx & Rx) ------------------------| ›x(Jx & Rx) | | | SHOW ! | --------------------- | | | Ja & Ra | | | | | | œx~(Rx & ~Px) | | œx~~(Rx ÷ Px) | | | | œx(Rx ÷ Px) | |

P P ID AID DD 4, 1, 7, 8,

›E QN ~÷ DN

319

Introductory Logic

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. | | | | | | | | | | | | Ra ÷ Pa | | Ra | | Pa | | œx~(Jx & Px) | | ~(Ja & Pa) | | | ~Ja w ~Pa | Ja | | ~~Ja | | ~Pa | | ! | --------------------| 9, œE | 6, &E | 10,11, ÷E | 2, QN | 13, œE | 14, DeM | 6, &E | 16, DN | 15, 17, vE | 12, 18, !I |

------------------------7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

œx(Cx w Nx) ~›x(Kx & Nx) SHOW œx(Kx ÷ Cx)

P P UD

-------------------| SHOW Ka ÷ Ca | CD | ---------------------- | | | Ka || ACD | | SHOW Ca || DD | | ------------------- || ||| 2, QN | | | œx~(Kx & Nx) | | | ~(Ka & Na) ||| 7, œE | | | ~(Ka & ~~Na) ||| 8, DN | | | ~~(Ka ÷ ~Na) ||| 9, ~ ÷ | | | Ka ÷ ~Na ||| 10, DN | | | ~Na ||| 5, 11, ÷E | | | Ca w Na ||| 1, œE | | | Ca ||| 12, 13, wE | | ------------------- || | ---------------------- | ------------------------~œx›yHxy SHOW ›xœy~Hxy --------------------------| | ›x~›yHxy | ›xœy~Hxy | --------------------------P DD 1, QN 3, QN P P DD 1, QN 4, ›E 2, œE 5, ›I 7, QN 6, 8, ÷E 9, ›I

9.

1. 2. 3. 4.

11. 1. 2. 3.

~œxKmx œx(Lx ÷ œyKyx) SHOW ›x~Lx --------------------------| 4. | ›x~Kmx 5. | ~Kmj | | 6. | Lj ÷ œyKyj 7. | ›y~Kyj | | 8. | ~œyKyj 9. | ~Lj | | 10. | ›x~Lx ---------------------------

13. 1. 2. 3. 4.

~›x~œyOxy P œxœy(Oxy ø Pyx) P UD SHOW œxœyPxy --------------------------| SHOW œyPoy | UD | ----------------------- |

320

| | SHOW Pot | | UD | | ------------------- | | 6. | | | œx~~œyOxy | | | 1, QN | | | 6, DN 7. | | | œxœyOxy 8. | | | œyOty | | | 7, œE 9. | | | Oto | | | 8, œE | | | 2, œE 10. | | | œy(Oty ø Pyt) 11. | | | Oto ø Pot | | | 10, œE 11. | | | Pot | | | 9, 11, øE | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | --------------------------15. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 17. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 19. 1. 2. 3. ~œx~Ax SHOW ›xAx --------------------------| ›x~~Ax | | ›xAx | --------------------------SHOW ~œx~Ax --------------------------| ~~›xAx | | ~œx~Ax | --------------------------~œx(Fx ÷ Gx) ~›x(Fx & ~Gx) SHOW ! --------------------------| ›x~(Fx ÷ Gx) | | ~(Fa ÷ Ga) | | Fa & ~Ga | | ›x(Fx & ~Gx) | | ! | --------------------------›xœy(My ÷ Pxy) ›x(Mx & ~›yPyx) ›xAx

5.

P DD 1, QN 3, DN P DD 1, DN 3, QN P P DD 1, QN 4, ›E 5, ~ ÷ 6, ›I 2, 7, !I P P DD 1, ›E 2, ›E 5, &E 5, &E 4, œE 6, 8, ÷E 7, QN 10. œE 9, 11, !I

SHOW ! --------------------------| 4. | œy(My ÷ Pay) | 5. | Mb & ~ ›yPyb 6. | Mb | 7. | ~›yPyb | 8. | Mb ÷ Pab | 9. | Pab | | 10. | œy~Pyb 11. | ~Pab | 12. | ! | ---------------------------

Exercises 10-2 1. 1. œxZx ÷ Wa P 2. SHOW ›x(Zx ÷ Wa) ID -----------------------| AID 3. | ~›x(Zx ÷ Wa) 4. | SHOW ! | DD | -------------------- | | | 3, QN 5. | | œx~(Zx ÷ Wa) 6. | | œx(Zx & ~Wa) | | 5, ~ ÷ 7. | | Za & ~Wa | | 6, œE 8. | | ~Wa | | 7, &E

321

Introductory Logic

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. | | ~œxZx | | | | ›x~Zx | | | | ~Zb | | | | Zb & ~Wa | | | | Zb | | | | ! | | | -------------------- | -----------------------1, 8, MT 9, QN 10, ›E 6, œE 12, &E 11, 13, !I

3.

SHOW ›x(›xMx ÷ Mx) ID --------------------------------2. | ~›x(›xMx ÷ Mx) | AID 3. | SHOW ! | DD | ----------------------------- | | | 2, QN 4. | | œx~(›xMx ÷ Mx) 5. | | ~( ›xMx ÷ Ma) | | 4, œE | | 5, ~ ÷ 6. | | ›xMx & ~Ma 7. | | ›xMx | | 6, &E 8. | | Mb | | 7, ›E 9. | | ~( ›xMx ÷ Mb) | | 4, œE 10. | | ›xMx & ~Mb | | 9, ~ ÷ 11. | | ~Mb | | 10, &E 12. | | ! | | 8, 11, !I | ----------------------------- | --------------------------------1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. SHOW œxœy(Txy ÷ ›zTzy) --------------------------| | SHOW œy(Tay ÷ ›zTzy | ----------------------- | | | SHOW Tab ÷ ›zTzb | | | | ------------------- | | | | | Tab | | | | | | SHOW ›xTzb | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | | ›zTzb | | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | --------------------------›x[Wx & ~›y(Ax & Bxy))] SHOW œx[Ax ÷ ›y(Wy & ~Byx)]

5.

UD UD CD ACD DD 4, ›I

7.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

P UD CD ACD DD 1, ›E 6, &E 6, &E 8, QN 9, œE 4, DN 10, 11, vE 7, 12, &I 13, ›I

--------------------------| SHOW Aa ÷ ›y(Wy & ~Bya) | | ----------------------- | | | Aa | | | | SHOW ›y(Wy & ~Bya) | | | | ------------------- | | | | | Wb & ~ ›y(Ay & Bby)| | | | | | Wb | | | | | | ~ ›y(Ay & Bby) | | | | | | œy~(Ay & Bby) | | | | | | ~Aa v ~Bba | | | | | | ~~Aa | | | | | | ~Bba | | | | | | Wb & ~Bba | | | | | | | | | ›y(Wy & ~Bya) | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | ---------------------------

322

9.

1. 2. 3.

›x(Cx v Dx) SHOW ›xCx v ›xDx

P DD CD ACD DD 1, 4, 7, 6, 9, EI QN œE 8, vE ›I

**--------------------------| SHOW ~›xCx ÷ ›xDx | | ----------------------- | | | 4. | | ~ ›xCx 5. | | SHOW ›xDx | | | | ------------------- | | 6. | | | Ca v Da | | | 7. | | | œx~Cx | | | 8. | | | ~Ca | | | 9. | | | Da | | | 10. | | | ›xDx | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | 11. | ›xCx v ›xDx | --------------------------1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
**

›xCx v ›xDx SHOW ›x(Cx v Dx)

3, ÷v P ID AID DD 3, QN 5, Dem UD DD 6, œE 9, &E 7, QN 1, 11, vE 12, ›E 6, œE 14, &E 13, 15, !I

--------------------------| |~›x(Cx v Cx) | SHOW ! | | ----------------------- | | | œx~(Cx v Dx) | | | | œx(~Cx & ~Dx) | | | | SHOW œx~Cx | | | | ------------------- | | | | | SHOW ~Ca | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | | ~Ca & ~Da | | | | | | | | ~Ca | | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | ------------------- | | | | ~ ›xCx | | | | ›xDx | | | | Db | | | | ~Cb & ~Db | | | | ~Db | | | | ! | | | ----------------------- | --------------------------œx(Fa ÷ Gx) SHOW Fa ÷ œxGx

11. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

P CD ACD UD DD 1, œE 3, 6, ÷E

--------------------------| Fa | | | SHOW œxGx | ----------------------- | | | SHOW Gb | | | | ------------------- | | | | | Fa ÷ Gb | | | | | | Gb | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | ---------------------------

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

P Fa ÷ œxGx SHOW œx(Fa ÷ Gx) UD --------------------------| CD | SHOW Fa ÷ Gb | ----------------------- | | | Fa | | ACD | | SHOW Gb | | DD

323

Introductory Logic

| | ------------------- | | | | | œxGx | | | | | | Gb | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | --------------------------›xœy(Ix ø Iy) SHOW ~›xIx v œxIx --------------------------| SHOW ~~›xIx ÷ œxIx | | ----------------------- | | | ~~ ›xIx | | | | | | SHOW œxIx | | ------------------- | | | | | SHOW Ia | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | | œy(Ib ø Iy) | | | | | | | | ›xIx | | | | | | | | Ic | | | | | | | | Ib ø Ic | | | | | | | | Ib | | | | | | | | Ib ø Ia | | | | | | | | Ia | | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- | | ~›xIx v œxIx | ---------------------------

6. 7.

1, 4, ÷E 6, œE

13. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

P DD CD ACD UD DD 1, ›E 4, DN 8, ›E 7, œE 9, 10, øE 7, œE 11, 12, øE

14. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20.

3, ÷w P DD DD DD CD ACD DD 6, ›E 8, DN 1, vE 10. œE CD ACD DD 13, ›E 15, DN 1, vE 17. œE

~›xIx v œxIx SHOW ›xœy(Ix ø Iy) --------------------------| | SHOW œy(Ia ø Iy) | ----------------------- | | | SHOW Ia ø Ib | | | | ------------------- | | | | | | | | SHOW Ia ÷ Ib | | | --------------- | | | | | | | Ia | | | | | | | | | | | | SHOW Ib | | | | ----------- | | | | | | | | | ›xIx | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ~~ ›xIx | | | | | œxIx | | | | | | | | | | Ib | | | | | | | | | ----------- | | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | SHOW Ib ÷ Ia | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | | Ib | | | | | | | | SHOW Ia | | | | | | | | ----------- | | | | | | | | | ›xIx | | | | | | | | | | ~~ ›xIx | | | | | | | | | | œxIx | | | | | | | | | | Ib | | | | | | | | | ----------- | | | | | | | --------------- | | | | | | Ia ø Ib | | | | | ------------------- | | | ----------------------- |

324

21. | ›xœy(Ix ø Iy) | --------------------------15. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

3, ›I P DD

œx(Sx ø La) SHOW (›xSx ÷ La) & (La ÷ œxSx)

15. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

------------------------------------| CD | SHOW ›xSx ÷ La | --------------------------------- | | | ›xSx | | ACD | | SHOW La | | DD | | ----------------------------- | | | | | Sb | | | 4, ›E | | | Sb ø La | | | 1, œE | | | La | | | 6, 7, øE | | ----------------------------- | | | --------------------------------- | | SHOW La ÷ œxSx | CD | --------------------------------- | | | La | | ACD | | SHOW œxSx | | UD | | ----------------------------- | | | | | SHOW Sc | | | DD | | | ------------------------- | | | | | | | Sc ø La | | | | 1, œE | | | | Sc | | | | 10, 13, øE | | | ------------------------- | | | | | ----------------------------- | | | --------------------------------- | | 3, 9, &I | (›xSx ÷ La) & (La ÷ œxSx) ------------------------------------(›xSx ÷ La) & (La ÷ œxSx) DD SHOW œx(Sx ø La) UD ------------------------------------| SHOW Sb ø La | DD | --------------------------------- | | | SHOW Sb ÷ La | | CD | | ----------------------------- | | | | | Sb | | | ACD | | | SHOW La | | | DD | | | ------------------------- | | | | | | | 1, &E | | | | ›xSx ÷ La | | | | ›xSx | | | | 6, ›I | | | | La | | | | 7, 8, ÷E | | | ------------------------- | | | | | ----------------------------- | | | | SHOW La ÷ Sb | | CD | | ----------------------------- | | | | | La | | | ACD | | | DD | | | SHOW Sb | | | ------------------------- | | | | | | | La ÷ œxSx | | | | 1, &E | | | | 11, 13, ÷E | | | | œxSx | | | | Sb | | | | 14, œE | | | ------------------------- | | | | | ----------------------------- | | | | Sb ø La | | 4, 10, øI | --------------------------------- | ------------------------------------›xœyFxy ›x~›yFyx

17. 1. 2. 3. 4.

P P DD 1, ›E

SHOW ! -----------------------| | œxFay

325

7.| | | | 326 . 4. 5. 9. 1. The point of the lemma is to get both lines 30 and 34 without having to duplicate the maneuvers it contains. 6. œE 12. | ~›yFyb | | Fab | | œy~Fyb | | ~Fab | | ! | -----------------------2. QN 8. | | SHOW ! | | | | --------------------------. | ~Rba | 8. P P P UD ID AID DD 2.| | | | | SHOW œy(Rcy ÷ [(Pcy v Pyc) v (Rcy & Ryc)] | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------. 2. 1. 9. 8. which is proved in lines 8-26. ›E œE QN œE 8. | Rba | 9. 1. | ~›yRya | 6. ~œx(Fx ÷ ›yRyx) P DD 3. 7.| ----------------------------------- 9. 7. ›E 5. !I 23.| | | | | | | SHOW (Rcd ÷ [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)]) | | | | | | | | ---------------------------------------------. 4. Note: the direct derivation that follows is perhaps not quite as short as the indirect derivation. | œyRby | 1. 6. 5. vE 10. | ~(Fa ÷ ›yRya) | 5. &E | 7.| | | ------------------------------. 11. 8. QN | 4. 4. but it is instructive. 6. !I ---------------------------------œxœyœz[(Rxy & Ryz) ÷ Rxxz] œxœy(Rxy v Ryx) œxœy[Pxy ø (Rxy & ~Ryx)] SHOW œxRxx 21. | Fa & ~ ›yRya 7. ›E 10. ›xœyRxy P 2. !I 19. œE 11. 6. ~ ÷ 6. œxœyœz[(Rxy & Ryz) ÷ Rxz] œxœy(Rxy v Ryx) œxœy[Pxy ø (Rxy & ~Ryx)] SHOW œxœy[(Pxy v Pyx) v (Rxy & Ryx)] P P P UD UD DD UD UD CD -------------------------------------------------------------| SHOW œy[(Pay v Pya) v (Ray & Rya)] | | ---------------------------------------------------------. 6. 8.| | | | | 8. 2.Introductory Logic 5. œE œE ----------------------------------| | SHOW Raa | ------------------------------.| 6. In line 7 we state a lemma. SHOW ! ---------------------------------4. 5. | œy~Rya 9. | | ~Raa | | 7. | | | Raa | | | 11. | | | œy(Ray v Rya) 9. | | | Raa v Raa | | | 10.| | | (Pab v Pba) v (Rab & Rba) | | | | SHOW œxœy(Rxy ÷ [(Pxy v Pyx) v (Rxy & Ryx)]) | | | | -----------------------------------------------------. | ! | 10. | ›x~(Fx ÷ ›yRyx) | 2. 3. 3. | | | ! | | | | | --------------------------.

œE 28. | | | | | | | | (Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc) | | | | | | | | 15.| | | | | | | 20. | | ! | | | ------------------------------. vE 4.| | | | | | | | | ---------------------------------------------. P P ID AID DD 1. &E 10. | | | | | | SHOW ~Rdc ÷ [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | CD | | | | | | -------------------------------------.| | | | | -----------------------------------------------------. œE 23. | | ~Pa & ~ ›y(Sya & Py) | | 7. | | | | | | | ~Rdc | | | | | | | ACD 19. œE 29.34. | | ~Pa | | 8. | | | | | | | | [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | | | 25.&I 16. | | Pg | | 9.SC2 | | | | | -----------------------------------------. 11. 2.&I 21. | | | | | | SHOW Rdc ÷ [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | CD | | | | | | -------------------------------------. | | Rba ÷ [(Pab v Pba) v (Rab & Rba)] | | 33. | | | | | | | | Rcd & ~Rdc | | | | | | | | 10. | | ›y(Sya & Py) | | | | 11. Com 35. !I 327 .30.| 6. &E 2. Dem 6. ~Sga ~[Pa v ›y(Sya & Py)] Pa v Pg SHOW ~Sga ----------------------------------4. | | | | | | [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | 12.| | | | | | 13. | SHOW ! | | ------------------------------.18. | | | | | | | | œy[Pcy ø (Rcy & ~Ryc)] | | | | | | | | 3. | | œy(Ray ÷ [(Pay v Pya) v (Ray & Rya)] | | 7. vI 25. &I 9. | | œy(Rby ÷ [(Pby v Pyb) v (Rby & Ryb)] | | 7.| | | | | | 26. | | | | | | | | Rcd & Rdc | | | | | | | | 10. Com 34. vI | | | | | | | ---------------------------------. vI | | | | | | | ---------------------------------. œE 30. | | Rab ÷ [(Pab v Pba) v (Rab & Rba)] | | 29. | | ~ ›y(Sya & Py) 12.| 1.| | 27. 3. | | Sga & Pg | | 10. | | | | | | | | Pcd | | | | | | | |20.œE 22.| | | | | | 17. 8.| | | | | | 18. | | Rba ÷ [(Pba v Pab) v (Rba & Rab)] | | 31. ›I 6. | | | | | SHOW (Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc) | | | | | DD | | | | | -----------------------------------------. SÎÏ: Î is in the same physics section as Ï a: Alonzo g: Gertrude Translation: ~[Pa v ›y(Sya & Py)] Pa v Pg Therefore. | | Rba ÷ [(Pab v Pba) v (Rba & Rab)] | | 32. | | | | | | | SHOW [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | | DD | | | | | | | ---------------------------------. øE 24. | | œy(Ray v Rya) | | 2. | Sga | 5. | | [(Pab v Pba) v (Rab & Rba)] | | |28. | | | | | | | SHOW [(Pcd v Pdc) v (Rcd & Rdc)] | | | | | | | ---------------------------------. | | | | | | | | Pcd v Pdc | | | | | | | | 24.23.| -------------------------------------------------------------- 25.17.| | | | | 12. œE 32. | | Rab v Rby | | 27. | | | | | Rcd | | | | | ACD 11.SC | ---------------------------------------------------------. 7.| | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------.10. | | | | | | | | Pcd ø (Rcd & ~Rdc) | | | | | | | | 21.| | | | | | | 15.13.| | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------. | | | | | | | Rdc | | | | | | | ACD | | | | | | | DD 14. D: People PÎ: Î is a philosophy major. œE 33. œE 31.| | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------.

Dem 9. 2. 16. Cities FÎÏÐ: Î is farther from Ï than from Ð. &I 27. 13. ›E 6. 7.| ----------------------------------------------- ACD ID AID DD 1.| | | | | Pj & ›x[(Wx & Rx) & Ljx] | | | | | | Pj | | | | | | | | | (Pj & ~ ›y[(Wy & Ny) & Ljy]) ÷ ~Laj | | | ~~Laj | | | | | | ~(Pj & ~ ›y[(Wy & Ny) & Ljy]) | | | | | | ~Pj v ~~ ›y[(Wy & Ny) & Ljy]) | | | | | | ~~Pj | | | | | | | | | ~~›y[(Wy & Ny) & Ljy]) | | | ›y[(Wy & Ny) & Ljy]) | | | | | | (Wa & Na) & Lja | | | | | | œy~[(Wy & Ny) & ~Ry] | | | | | | ~[(Wa & Na) & ~Ra] | | | | | | ~(Wa & Na) v ~~Ra | | | | | | Wa & Na | | | | | | ~~(Wa & Na) | | | | | | ~~Ra | | | | | | Ra | | | | | | Wa & (Na & Lja) | | | | | | Wa | | | | | | Na & Lja | | | | | | Wa & Ra | | | | | | (Wa & Ra) & (Na & Lja) | | | | | | | | | ›y[(Wy & Ry) & (Ny & Ljy)] | | | ~›y[(Wy & Ry) & (Ny & Ljy)] | | | | | | ! | | | | | --------------------------------------. Laj ÷ ›y[Wy & Ny) & ~Ry] 1. 13. vE 15. 30. LÎÏ a : Alonzo j : Jeffrey (Pj & ›x[(Wx & Rx) & Ljx]) & ~ ›y[(Wy & Ry) & (Ny & Ljy)] œx(~›y[(Wy & Ny) & Lxy] ÷ ~Lax) Therefore. &E 8. 31. 17. 11. 12. 14. vE 23. d: Washington.S. 6. DN 17. 11. 15. 24. MT 12. &E 2. 18.| | | ------------------------------------------. ›I 1.Introductory Logic ----------------------------------- 27. 5. 22. D: U. 27. 3. 21. Assoc 25. œE 4. 25. &E 24. &I 29. 20. 1. &E 30. 22. DN 16. ----------------------------------------------| Laj | | SHOW ›y[(Wy & Ny) & ~Ry] | | ------------------------------------------. 14. (Pj & ›x[(Wx & Rx) & Ljx]) & ~›y[(Wy & Ry) & (Ny & Ljy)] œx[(Px &b~›y[(Wy & Ny) & Lxy]) ÷ ~Lax] SHOW Laj ÷ ›y[(Wy & Ny) & ~Ry] P P CD 4. DN 20. 26. &E 21. œE 19. 8. 28. DC 328 . 23. 19.| | | ~›y[(Wy & Ny) & ~Ry] | | | | SHOW ! | | | | --------------------------------------. 10. &E 25. 32. !I Exercises 10-3 (Since the derivations are straightforward. vE 13. I have omitted them. DN 10. D: Persons and wines WÎ : Î is a wine RÎ : Î is red NÎ : Î is from New York State PÎ : Î is a person. 26. QN 18. 9. 28. 29. 31. Dem 17.

329 . Ï. 2} MÎÏ: <ÎÏ> is in {<1. 2>. œx[(Sx & x … a) ÷ Tax] 1. 2>} PÎ: Î is in {1} VÎÏ: <Î. CA Fndp Fnsd ˆ Fnsp D: {1. Ð> is in {<1. 9. D: People CÎ: Î commits crimes DÎ: Î is liable to disbarment EÎ: Î has embezzled money from a client LÎ: Î is a lawyer h: Hugh Louis Dewey œx[(Lx & Cx) ÷ Dx] Lh & Eh ˆ Dh Add premise: œx(Ex ÷ Cx) Chapter 11: Exercises 11-1 œx(Bx ÷ x = t) ›x[(Sx & Bx) & œy[(Sy & By) ÷ x = y]) ~›x[Bx & (x … t & Sx)] œx[(Sx & x … e) ÷ Txe] ›xœy[([My & Sy] & Lyg) ÷ x = y] or œxœy[([(Mx & Sx) & Lxg] & [(My & Sy) & Lyg] ÷ x = y] 11. 1>} d: 1 n: 1 p: 2 s: 2 Add premise: œxœyœzœw[(Fxyz & Fxzw) ÷ Fxyw] 3. PA s: San Francisco. 5. 7.Ï> is in {<2. 1. D: People MÎÏ: Î is married to Ï PÎ: Î is a physician VÎÏ: Î goes on vacation with Ï m: me œx(Vmx ÷ Mxm) ›x(Px & Vmx) ˆ ›x(Px & Mmx) D: {1. 3. <1. 2.n: New York City p: Philadelphia. 1>} m: 2 Add Premise: œxœy(Mxy ÷ Myx) 5. 2} FÎÏÐ: <Î.

7. 13. ›x[(Wx Lax) & ›y([(My & Lyg) & œz([Mz & Lzg] ÷ y = z)] & Kxy)] 5. Your interpretation must have exactly one item in its domain. Your interpretation must have all of the following: . or . Your interpretation must have: the thing labeled r is not W 3. 330 . The sentence on the left is a logical truth. D = People JÎ: Î could be jivin' LÎÏ: Î loves Ï i : me m : my mother ~›x(x … m & lxi) & Jm 15.) IÎ : Î has been impeached c : William Clinton j : Andrew Johnson ~›x[x … j & x … c) & Ix] Exercises 11-2 1. D = Presidents (sc. ›x([(Wx & Kxa) & œy[(Wy & Kya) ÷ x = y]] & Rx) 3.At least two things fail to be G. 9.Everything is G. Your interpretation must have no more than two items in its domain and exactly one thing that is F .at least two items in its domain. Your interpretation must have at least two items in its domain which are F or at least two items which are not F. 5. Your interpretation must satisfy one of the following two conditions: .Introductory Logic 13. of the U. 11. ›x›y[([(Mx & Lgx) & œz[(Mz & Lgz) ÷ x = z]] & [(Wy & Lay) & œz[(Wz & Laz) ÷ y = z]]) & Kxy] Exercises 11-3 1. Your interpretation must have nothing that is G.S.

| | | ------------------------------------. &E | | | | | a = c | | | | |7. 7.| | | | | | | | | a = b | | | | |5. | a = t | 9.=E | | | | ------------------------.| | | SHOW œz[(a = b) & (b = z) ÷ a = z] | | UD | | --------------------------------. 5. 9. | Nt | ------------------------------------ 1. 2. &E 6.÷E 4. | [Ra & œy(Ry ÷ a = y)] & Na | 5. Exercises 11-4: 1.| | | | | | | ----------------------------.| | | | | --------------------------------. ›I 3.8.| | | | | | | a = b & b = c | | | | ACD | | | | SHOW a = c | | | | DD | | | | ------------------------. ›xœy(Ay ø x = y) SHOW ›x[Ax & œy(Ay ÷ x = y)] --------------------------------------| œy(Ay ø a = y) | | Aa ø a = a | P DD 1. 4. ›x([Rx & œy(Ry ÷ x = y)] & Nx) Rt SHOW Nt -----------------------------------4. ›E 4. 3. =E UD DD =I 3. œE 2. 4.| --------------------------------- 7. 7. 2. | Rt ÷ a = t | 8. 8. &E | | | | | b = c | | | | |5. 1.. SHOW œxœyœz[(x = y & y = z) ÷ x = z] UD ----------------------------------------| SHOW œyœz[(a = y & y = z) ÷ a = z] | UD | ------------------------------------. | Ra & œy(Ry ÷ a = y) | 6. 4.| | | | | SHOW (a = b & b = c) ÷ a = c | | | CD | | | ----------------------------. 2. œE 331 . 3.each thing Qs something other than itself. | œy(Ry ÷ a = y) | 7. 3. ›E 3. 2. 5. 6. 3. &E 8. SHOW œx›y x = y -------------------------------| SHOW ›y a = y | | ---------------------------.| ----------------------------------------P P DD 1. &E 5.nothing Qs itself. 1.| | | a = a | | | | ›y a = y | | | ---------------------------. 9. and . | Na | 10. 1.

&E | œy(Ay ÷ a = y) | 3. 7. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | a = a | =I Aa |4.| | | | | | | a = b | | | | | | | | DD | | | | SHOW Ab | | | | ----------------------. 14. 9.Introductory Logic 5.| | ----------------------------------. 14.| | | | | |8. ›E | Aa | 3. 1. øI | | | Ab ø a = b | | ------------------------------.| | | | Ab | | | ACD | | SHOW a = b | | | DD | | --------------------------.| | | SHOW Ab ø a = b | | DD | | ------------------------------. 4. 1. 12. ›I --------------------------------------P 13. 7.| | SHOW Ab ÷ a = b | | CD | ------------------------------.| | | ----------------------------------. 3. 8. &E | SHOW œy(Ay ø a = y) | UD | ----------------------------------. &I ›x[Ax & œy(Ay ÷ x = x)] | 13. 7.| | ›xœy(Ay ø x = y) | 6. 9. 2. ›I --------------------------------------œx›yGxy ~›xGxx ~›x›y x…y ›x[Ax & œy(Ay ÷ x = y)] SHOW ›xœy(Ay ø x = y) P P P DD 1. 10. 11. 332 DD --------------------------------------| Aa & œy(Ay ÷ a = y) | 1. 5. 6. ›E 3.øE SHOW œy(Ay ÷ a = y) | UD ----------------------------------.| | | | | Ab ÷ a = b | | | 5. œE 5. QN SHOW ! ------------------------------| ›yGay | | Gab | | œy~›y x … y | . 4. 3. 11. VD | | | SHOW a = b ÷ Ab | | | CD | | | --------------------------. 6.10. 9.=E | | | | ----------------------.øE | | --------------------------. 7.| | | | | | Ab ø a = b | | | | 3. 13.| Aa & œy(Ay ÷ a = y) | 6. 9.| | | | | | | --------------------------. 10. 8.| | | | ------------------------------. 5. 11. 5. œE | | | a = b | | | |9. 2. 6.| | | | | | | | | Ab | | | | |4. 12.

| SHOW Fa ÷ œxFx | CD | ----------------------------. œE | | ------------------------. 1. DN 6. | | | | b = a | | | | 1. 15. | | SHOW œxFx | | UD | | ------------------------.| | | ----------------------------. 12. 12.| | 10.| | | ----------------------------. 14. 8. 4. œE 12.| 8. œE 10. 13. !I ›xœy x = y ›xFx ›YDy ~›x(Fx & Dx) SHOW ! ------------------------------| Fa | | Db | | Fa & Db | | | œy c = y | c = a | | c = b | | a = b | | Fa & Da | | ›x(Fx & Dx) | | ! | ------------------------------- 13. 11.| | | | | ------------------------. 9. 2. =E 12. 3. ›E 3. ›I 4. 11. &I 1. | | Fa | | ACD 9.8. 5. 11. | | SHOW Fa | | DD | | ------------------------. | | | | | | | ~ ›y a … y | œy~ a … y | ~ a … b | a = b | Gaa | ›xGxx | ! | ------------------------------- 7.| 14. | SHOW œxFx ÷ Fa | CD | ----------------------------.| 7. 1.| | | 11. 13. 14. 6. œE 10.| 4. =E | | | --------------------. 11. | œxFx ø Fa | 3. | | | SHOW Fb | | | DD | | | --------------------. œE 9. 7. 13. | | œxFx | | ACD 5. ›E 6. | | | | Fb | | | | 8. œx(x = a w x = b) 333 P . 1. !I P P P P DD 2. 7. ›I 2. œE 8. QN 9.SHOW œxFx ø Fa DD --------------------------------3. 10. 10. ›E 9. 11. =E 8. =E 13. øE --------------------------------15.| | 6. œx x = a P 2. 9. 12. 7. | | | Fa | | | 4. 11. 14.

&I | | ------------------------------.| 9.| | | | 19.| 10.| | | 13. | | | SHOW Fc | | | DD | | | --------------------------.| | 12. | | | Fa | | | 4. œE 7. | | SHOW (Fa & Fb) | | DD | | ------------------------------.| 4.19.| | | | | 17.22.| | | ----------------------------------. | | | | | | Fc | | | | | |20. | | Fa & Fb | | ACD 11.17. œE 8.| | | | | | | | | ----------------------. &E 18. øI --------------------------------------- 334 .| | | | | | | | | ----------------------. | œxFx ø (Fa & Fb) | 3. | | | | | c = b | | | | | ACD | | | | | DD 21.| | | | 15.SC | | | --------------------------. 9. | | | | | | Fb | | | | | | 10. | | | | | SHOW Fc | | | | | ------------------. | SHOW (Fa & Fb) ÷ œxFx | CD | ----------------------------------. | | | Fa & Fb | | |6.14. œE 14. | | | | c = a w c = b | | | | 1. | | | | | SHOW Fc | | | | | DD | | | | | ------------------. | | | | | | Fa | | | | | | 10. &E 23.| | | | 24. | | œxFx | | ACD 5.Introductory Logic 2. | | | | | c = a | | | | | ACD 16. SHOW œxFx ø (Fa & Fb) DD --------------------------------------| CD 3.=E | | | | | ------------------. | | | | SHOW c = a ÷ Fc | | | | CD | | | | ----------------------.| | | | | ------------------------------. | | | Fb | | | 4.| | 6. 7. | | | | Fc | | | |13. | | | | SHOW c = b ÷ Fc | | | | CD | | | | ----------------------. | SHOW œxFx ÷ (Fa & Fb) | ----------------------------------. | | SHOW œxFx | | UD | | ------------------------------.| | | | 20.| 25.| | | ----------------------------------. | | | | | | Fc | | | | | |15. =E | | | | | ------------------.| | | | | 22.

Basic Rules &E N&R ))))) N&R R )))))) &I N wE N R ))) N&R NvR ~N )))))) R øE NvR ~R )))))) N NøR R N ))))))) wI N ))) R ))) NwR NwR NøR N ))))))) øI N÷R R÷N )))))) R ÷E NøR !I N÷R N ))))))) R ~N ))))) ! N ›E ›<N ))))) N[<>0] ›I provided 0 is new to the derivation N[<>0] ))))))) ›<N œE œ<N )))) N[<>0] =E 0=: N[0] N[:/0 ] )))) : = 0 0 and : are names N[0] N[0] contains one or more 0's )))) N[:/0] N[:/0] is N[0] with one or more 0's replaced by :'s =I ))))) 0=0 Where 0 is any name Derivation rules SHOW N +))))))))))))). * ! * * ** * *. N * ACD * * SHOW R * * *+)))))))))))))). )))))))))))* . * *. ~N * AID * * SHOW ! * DD *+))))))))))))). * * * * N . * provided 0 is * SHOW N[<>0] *+ ))))))))))).))))))))))))))))))- SHOW N ID +)))))))))))))))))).))))))))))))))))))- 335 . * new to the ** * * derivation *.))))))))))))).)))))))))))))).)))))))))))))))))))))SHOW œ<N UD +)))))))))))))))))).)))))))))))))DD SHOW N ÷ R CD +))))))))))))))))))))).

Introductory Logic Derived Rules MT N÷R ~R ))))))) ~N R N ))) N SC NwR N÷2 R÷2 ))))))) SC2 ~N ÷ R )))))))) N÷R R 2 HS N÷R R÷2 )))))))) N÷2 Second Form of ID SHOW ~N +)))))))))))))))))))). * N * * SHOW ! * *+)))))))))))))))).))))))))))))))))))))Replacement Rules DN ~÷ ~~N :: N DeM ~ø Com ~(N & R) :: ~N w ~R ~(N w R) :: ~N & ~R ~(N ø R) :: ~N ø R ID AID DD ~(N ÷ R) :: N & ~R Assoc N & (R & 2) :: (N & R) & 2 N w (R w 2) :: (N w R) w 2 N ø (R ø 2) :: (N ø R) ø 2 Dist N & R :: R & N N w R :: R w N N ø R :: R ø N N & (R w 2) :: (N & R) w (N & 2) N w (R & 2) :: (N w R) & (N w 2) N ÷ R :: ~R ÷ ~N ÷w N ÷ R :: ~N w R ~N ÷ R :: N w R ~œ<N :: ›<~N ~›<N :: œ<~N Ctr QN 336 .)))))))))))))))).* . * ** * * ** ! * * *.

- Practice Test 1 SolutionsUploaded byalicenuoli
- Solutions to Abstract Algebra - Chapter 1 (Dummit and Foote, 3e)Uploaded byChandranan Dhar
- Finance SyllabusUploaded bySureshArigela
- Argumentos e InferenciaUploaded byWilson Jose Charry
- Age of Revolutions Summative Unit ProjectUploaded byArpan
- 1. Critical ThinkingUploaded byYiannis Kaminis
- Solution to Stein Complex AnalysisUploaded byosw2002
- Rosen More ExamplesUploaded byK-Cube Morong
- cover letterUploaded byapi-341657061
- Math324 2aUploaded byshannerbanners
- 0457 Marking MemeoUploaded byMarshall-tendai Zifa-sire Zuku-chibika
- Rudin Solutions Chapter 9Uploaded byxmattyicex
- Assignment 1 Marking SchemeUploaded byChase O'Hara
- UGC NET 2012 IUploaded by29_ramesh170
- dbq civilization rubricUploaded byapi-216208844
- cl proc cat expanseUploaded byMayank Sharma
- 6 strategies to build a s c cultureUploaded byapi-237452717
- Persuasive WritingUploaded byMrs_PP
- DASC20011 Assessment CriteriaUploaded byDoris Ng
- Arm Dyn DebateUploaded bySamarande
- Treatise on Rhetorical Invention Book IUploaded byluckydexxx
- Evaluating Practical Reasoning, D. WaltonUploaded byAminLopez
- Brassier, Ray - Badiou's Materialist Epistemology of MathematicsUploaded byHeliogabalo de Emesa
- henry david thoreauUploaded byapi-260043325
- Critical Thinking Unit 2Uploaded bykaotao1
- Ch07Uploaded bysaadi777
- thoughtful arguments unit planUploaded byapi-279984117
- 05.arg.fin (1)Uploaded byJeon Somin
- brewer-1996-analogy.pdfUploaded byCláudio Ribeiro
- Live Leak - IBPS PO Mains 2016 Model Question Paper Based on Predicted PatternUploaded byTushita