Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A standard view is that whether an argument is valid is a matter of the argument's logical form. Many techniques are employed by logicians to represent an argument's logical form. A simple example, applied to two of the above illustrations, is the following: Let the letters 'P', 'Q', and 'S' stand, respectively, for the set of men, the set of ...
Each logic operator can be used in an assertion about variables and operations, showing a basic rule of inference. Examples: The column-14 operator (OR), shows Addition rule : when p =T (the hypothesis selects the first two lines of the table), we see (at column-14) that p ∨ q =T.
The validity of an inference depends on the form of the inference. That is, the word "valid" does not refer to the truth of the premises or the conclusion, but rather to the form of the inference. An inference can be valid even if the parts are false, and can be invalid even if some parts are true.
For example, the rule of inference called modus ponens takes two premises, one in the form "If p then q" and another in the form "p", and returns the conclusion "q". The rule is valid with respect to the semantics of classical logic (as well as the semantics of many other non-classical logics ), in the sense that if the premises are true (under ...
The following example in first-order logic (=) is a sentence. This sentence means that for every y, there is an x such that =. This sentence is true for positive real numbers, false for real numbers, and true for complex numbers. However, the formula
In propositional logic, modus ponens (/ ˈ m oʊ d ə s ˈ p oʊ n ɛ n z /; MP), also known as modus ponendo ponens (from Latin 'mode that by affirming affirms'), [1] implication elimination, or affirming the antecedent, [2] is a deductive argument form and rule of inference. [3]
The form shows that inference from P implies Q to the negation of Q implies the negation of P is a valid argument. The history of the inference rule modus tollens goes back to antiquity. [4] The first to explicitly describe the argument form modus tollens was Theophrastus. [5] Modus tollens is closely related to modus ponens.
These two definitions of formal logic are not identical, but they are closely related. For example, if the inference from p to q is deductively valid then the claim "if p then q" is a logical truth. [16] Formal logic needs to translate natural language arguments into a formal language, like first-order logic, to assess whether they are valid.