Professional Documents
Culture Documents
argument
H1
H2 H1, H2, … Hn the hypotheses (premises)
We use conjunction: H1 ^ H2 ^ H3…
Hn
C is the conclusion.
C
“” means “therefore” or “it follows that”
Validity of an Argument
• An argument is valid if
– whenever all hypotheses are true, the conclusion is also
true
• To prove that an argument is valid:
– Assume the hypotheses are true
– Use the rules of inference and logical equivalences to
determine that the conclusion is true
Some Rules of Inference
p
pq
------------------- [p (p q)] q Modus ponens
mode that affirms
q
q
pq [ q (p q)] p Modus tollens
-------------------
mode that denies
p
pq
qr
------------------- [(p q) (q r)] (p r) Hypothetical
syllogism
pr
pq
p [(p q) p] q Disjunctive
------------------- syllogism
Some Rules of Inference
p
-------------------
ppq Addition
pq
pq
------------------- pqp Simplification
p
p
q
------------------- [(p) (q)] (p q) Conjunction
pq
pq
p r [(p q) (p r)] (q r) Resolution
-------------------
qr
Example: Modus Ponens
from Latin: mode that affirms
p
p→q ( p∧( p→q ))→q Modus Ponens
∴q
• In other words:
If the hypothesis p is true
and the hypothesis (p q) is true
Then I can conclude q
Example: Modus Ponens
• p: “n is greater than 3”
• q: “n2 is greater than 9”
pq
qr Hypothetical syllogism
pr
____________________________________________
pTp Identity
pFp
pTT Domination
pFF
ppp Idempotent
ppp
( p) p Double Negation
Recap 1.2: Important Equivalences
pqqp Commutative
pqqp
(p q) r p (q r) Associative
(p q) r p (q r)
p (q r) (p q) (p r) Distributive
p (q r) (p q) (p r)
(p q) p q De Morgan’s
(p q) p q
Recap 1.2: Important Equivalences
p (p q) p Absorption
p (p q) p
p p T Negation
p p F
Example
p q Hypothesis
p Simplification using previous step
r p Hypothesis
r Modus tollens using steps 2 and 3
r s Hypothesis
s Modus ponens using steps 4 and 5
s t Hypothesis
Rules of Inference for Quantified Statements
xP(x)
therefore for at
least one specific c,
P(c) is true
Rules of Inference for Quantified Statements
In Universal Instantiation, we know that P(x) is true for all
values of x; therefore it must also be true of any
particular value of x, c.
In Universal Generalization, we know that P(c) is true for
any specific value of c; therefore it must be true for all
values, so x P(x).
In Existential Instantiation, we know that P(x) is true for at
least one specific value of x, c.
• In Universal Instantiation, we know that P(c) is true for
some particular value of c, so x P(x). Here c need not be
arbitrary but often is assumed to be.
Example
Show that the following argument is valid:
• Everyone in the discrete structures class
has taken a CSE course.
• Marla is a student in the discrete
structures class.
• Therefore, Marla has taken a CSE course.
Example:
Put into propositional form:
D(x) = x is in the discrete structures class
C(x) = x has taken a CSE course
Represent hypotheses:
STEP JUSTIFICATION
x(D(x) C(x)) Premise
p→q
q
(( p→q )∧q )→ p
∴p
p→q
¬p
(( p→q )∧¬p )→¬q
∴¬q