Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In propositional logic, material implication [1] [2] is a valid rule of replacement that allows a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not-or and that either form can replace the other in logical proofs.
negation: not propositional logic, Boolean algebra: The statement is true if and only if A is false. A slash placed through another operator is the same as placed in front. The prime symbol is placed after the negated thing, e.g. ′ [2]
The validity of a conditional proof does not require that the CPA be true, only that if it were true it would lead to the consequent. Conditional proofs are of great importance in mathematics. Conditional proofs exist linking several otherwise unproven conjectures, so that a proof of one conjecture may immediately imply the validity of several ...
In the equation above the conditional probability generalizes the logical statement , i.e. in addition to assigning TRUE or FALSE we can also assign any probability to the statement. The term a ( P ) {\displaystyle a(P)} denotes the base rate (aka. the prior probability ) of P {\displaystyle P} .
Propositional logic deals with statements, which are defined as declarative sentences having truth value. [29] [1] Examples of statements might include: Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. London is the capital of England. All Wikipedia editors speak at least three languages.
Phrased another way, denying the antecedent occurs in the context of an indicative conditional statement and assumes that the negation of the antecedent implies the negation of the consequent. It is a type of mixed hypothetical syllogism that takes on the following form : [ 1 ]
The material conditional (also known as material implication) is an operation commonly used in logic.When the conditional symbol is interpreted as material implication, a formula is true unless is true and is false.
In propositional logic, affirming the consequent (also known as converse error, fallacy of the converse, or confusion of necessity and sufficiency) is a formal fallacy (or an invalid form of argument) that is committed when, in the context of an indicative conditional statement, it is stated that because the consequent is true, therefore the ...