The Conditional and the

Biconditional
a more formal treatment
p⇒q Select the logically equivalent statement from the
options:
1. I’ll go to the movie only if it’s opening night.
A. opening night ⇒ I go to the movie
B.  I go to the movie ⇒ opening night
C. I don’t go to the movie ⇒ not opening night 

2. Only medication taken daily can cure this disease.

A. medication taken daily ⇒ disease cured
B. disease not cured ⇒ medication not taken daily
“If” C. disease cured ⇒ medication taken daily 
or
“Only if” ?
  To express the Conditional as a Network Diagram, we need to re-
write it using the Conjunction (“AND”) and Disjunction (“OR”)
p⇒q Connectives.
 Recall that the Conditional is True as long as the Antecedent is
False.
 And if the Antecedent is True, then the value of the Consequent is
the value of the Conditional.
 So, this means that the Conditional is True when either the
The Antecedent is False, or else, when the Consequent is also True.
 If p is the Antecedent and q is the PConsequent,
Q then P
we-->are
Q  saying
~p V Q
Conditional as that the conditional is true when: T T T T
a Network  ~p
 OR
T F F F

Diagram  q F T T T
F F T T
 In other words: ~p v q
 Can you make the truth table for ~p v q ?
~ PVQ
  In common usage, we often confuse the Conditional and the
Biconditional.
p⇔q  In logic, these are two separate connectives.
 Denoted by the bi-directional arrow: ⇔
 Given two statements p and q, the statement p ⇔ q is read as:
 “If and only if p, q”, or,
 “q if and only if p”, or,
 “If and only if q, p”, or,
 “p if and only if q”
 Given two statements p and q, the statement p ⇔ q is defined as:
The
(p ⇒ q) ^ (q ⇒ p)
Biconditional  For example: “If and only if x=3, x+5=8”
in Focus
p⇔q
 Given two statements p and q, the statement p ⇔ q is defined as:
(p ⇒ q) ^ (q ⇒ p)

 Given this definition, can you make the truth table for p ⇔ q ?

p q p⇒q q⇒p (p ⇒ q) ^ (q ⇒ p)
The T T T T T
Biconditional T F F T F
in Focus F T T F F
F F T T T
p⇔q  Given two statements p and q, the statement p ⇔ q is defined as:
(p ⇒ q) ^ (q ⇒ p)

 Can you make a network diagram based on this definition?

p q ~p ~q q⇒p (p ⇒ q) ^ (q ⇒ p) (~p v q) ^ (~q v p)

The T T F F T T T /\ T  = T
Biconditional T F F T T F F /\ T    F
in Focus F T T F F F T /\ F   F
F F T T T T T /\ T    T
Truth Table 1. Write the argument in symbolic form.

Procedure to 2. Construct a truth table that shows the truth value of each
premise and the truth value of the conclusion for all
Determine the combinations of truth values of the component statements.
3. If the conclusion is true in every row of the truth table in which
Validity of an all the premises are true, the argument is valid. If the
Argument conclusion is false in any row in which all the
premises are true, the argument is invalid.
 1. Write the argument in symbolic form.
Truth Table If Aristotle was human, then Aristotle was mortal. Aristotle was
Procedure to human. Therefore, Aristotle was mortal.
 Symbolic Form:
Determine the  Let h represent: Aristotle was human
Validity of an  Let m represent: Aristotle was mortal
Argument –
Example –  Structure in Symbolic Form:
    h ⇒ m T
Step 1     H  T
∴ m   F
 1. Write the argument in symbolic form.
h⇒m
Truth Table h
∴m
Procedure to
2. Construct a truth table that shows the truth value of each
Determine the premise and the truth value of the conclusion for all
combinations of truth values of the component statements.
Validity of an
Argument –
Example – h m
First Premise
h⇒m
Second Premise
h
Conclusion
m
Step 2 T
T
T
F
T
F
T
T
T
F
F T T F T
F F T F F
 1. Write the argument in symbolic form.
2. Construct a truth table that shows the truth value of each premise and the truth value of
Truth Table the conclusion for all combinations of truth values of the component statements.

3. If the conclusion is true in every row of the truth table in which all the
Procedure to premises are true, the argument is valid. If the conclusion is false in any
row in which all the premises are true, the argument is invalid.
Determine the First Premise Second Premise Conclusion
Validity of an h m
T T
h⇒m
T
h
T
m
T
Argument – T F F T F

Example – F T
F F
T
T
F
F
T
F
Step 3
All the premises are true only in Row 1. And the Conclusion is also true in
Row 1.
So, the argument is valid.