Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In logical argument and mathematical proof, the therefore sign, ∴, is generally used before a logical consequence, such as the conclusion of a syllogism. The symbol consists of three dots placed in an upright triangle and is read therefore. While it is not generally used in formal writing, it is used in mathematics and shorthand.
The following table lists many common symbols, together with their name, how they should be read out loud, and the related field of mathematics. Additionally, the subsequent columns contains an informal explanation, a short example, the Unicode location, the name for use in HTML documents, [1] and the LaTeX symbol.
Therefore (Mathematical symbol for "therefore" is ), if it rains today, we will go on a canoe trip tomorrow". To make use of the rules of inference in the above table we let p {\displaystyle p} be the proposition "If it rains today", q {\displaystyle q} be "We will not go on a canoe today" and let r {\displaystyle r} be "We will go on a canoe ...
Therefore B. Before being put into logical form the above statement could have been something like below. If Kelly does not finish his homework, he will not go to class Kelly did not finish his homework Therefore, Kelly will not go to class. The first two statements are the premises while the third is the conclusion derived from them.
Consider the modal account in terms of the argument given as an example above: All frogs are green. Kermit is a frog. Therefore, Kermit is green. The conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises because we can not imagine a possible world where (a) all frogs are green; (b) Kermit is a frog; and (c) Kermit is not green.
Therefore, not P. The first premise is a conditional ("if-then") claim, such as P implies Q. The second premise is an assertion that Q, the consequent of the conditional claim, is not the case. From these two premises it can be logically concluded that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim, is also not the case. For example:
Enderton, for example, observes that "modus ponens can produce shorter formulas from longer ones", [9] and Russell observes that "the process of the inference cannot be reduced to symbols. Its sole record is the occurrence of ⊦q [the consequent] ... an inference is the dropping of a true premise; it is the dissolution of an implication".
Example 1. One way to demonstrate the invalidity of this argument form is with a counterexample with true premises but an obviously false conclusion. For example: If someone lives in San Diego, then they live in California. Joe lives in California. Therefore, Joe lives in San Diego. There are many places to live in California other than San Diego.