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.
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 ...
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, 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:
In a structure, an interpretation ties the function and relation symbols to mathematical objects that justify their names: The interpretation of an -ary function symbol in a structure with domain is a function :, and the interpretation of an -ary relation symbol is a relation.
An example is Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal. Intuitively this is as valid as All Greeks are men, all men are mortal therefore all Greeks are mortals . To argue that its validity can be explained by the theory of syllogism would require that we show that Socrates is a man is the equivalent of a categorical ...
Logical consequence is necessary and formal, by way of examples that explain with formal proof and models of interpretation. [1] A sentence is said to be a logical consequence of a set of sentences, for a given language , if and only if , using only logic (i.e., without regard to any personal interpretations of the sentences) the sentence must ...
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 ...