Study Guides (248,228)
Canada (121,418)
Philosophy (114)
PHIL 210 (3)
n/a (2)
Midterm

PHIL 210 - Terms (Midterm)

7 Pages
207 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Philosophy
Course
PHIL 210
Professor
n/a
Semester
Summer

Description
Section 2.1 – Valid and Sound Arguments Logical Consequence – when a statement follows validly from given premises, it is also a logical consequence of the premises Section 2.2 – Methods of Proof Identity Elimination – given b=c, anything that holds true of b also holds true of c Identity Introduction – a=a can always be inferred from any set of premises, even no premises Identity Symmetry – given a = b, b = a *Transitivity of Identity – if a = b, and b = c, then a = c Chapter 4 – The Logic of Boolean Connectives Truth-functional – describes connectives, which, when used in a complex sentence, allows one to know the truth value of the complex sentence simply by looking at the truth values of the sentence's immediate constituents. Examples include ^, v, and the negation connective. Section 4.1 – Tautologies and Logical Truth Logical necessity – sentences that cannot be false, no matter the premises. Such a sentence is true in every logically possible circumstance. Ex. a = a Three forms of derivation: 1) TW 2) Truth tables 3) If one can prove a sentence using no premises whatsoever Logical possibility – a sentence that could be (or could have been) true, at least on logical grounds Ex. Going faster than the speed of light. Tautology – a simple kind of logical necessity; it is any sentence whose truth table has only T's in the column under its main connective. All tautologies are logically necessary; their truth is guaranteed by the structure and meaning of the truth-functional connectives, independent of the truth values of its constituent sentences. However, not all logically necessary claims are tautologies. Ex. a = a Section 4.2 – Logical and Tautological Equivalence Logical Equivalence – sentences that have the same truth values in every possible circumstance; having the same truth conditions Tautological Equivalence – sentences that can be seen to be equivalent simply in virtue of the meanings of the truth-functional connectives. All tautologically equivalent sentences are logically equivalent, but the reverse is usually not true. DeMorgan's Laws 1) The negation of a conjunction is logically equivalent to the disjunction of the negations of the original conjuncts. 2) The negation of a disjunction is equivalent to the conjunction of the negations of the original disjuncts Section 4.3 – Logical and Tautological Consequence Logical Consequence – sentence S is a logical consequence of set of premises P1... Pn, if it is impossible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion S is false Logical truths are sentences that are a logical consequence of a set of premises. Logically equivalent sentences are sentences that are a logical consequence of each other. Tautological consequence – a strict form of logical consequence; P is a tautological consequence of Q when all instances in which Q is true are also instances in which P is true. Section 4.5 – Pushing Negation Around Substitution of Equivalents – if P and Q are logically equivalent, then the results of substituting one for the othe in the context of a larger sentence are also logically equivalent. Ex. If P is logically equivalent to Q, then S(P) is logically equivalent to S(Q). Examples of substitution of logical equivalents: 1) Associativity of Conjunctions A sentence P ^ (Q ^ R) is logically equivalent to (P ^ Q) ^ R, which is in turn equivalent to P ^ Q ^ R. 2) Associativity of Disjunctions A sentence P v (Q v R) is logically equivalent to (P v Q) v R, which is in turn equivalent to P v Q v R. 3) Commutativity of Conjunctions A conjunction P ^ Q is logically equivalent to Q ^ P. 4) Commutativity of Disjunctions A disjunction P v Q is logically equivalent to Q v P. 5) Idempotence of Conjunctions A conjunction P ^ P is equivalent to P. Thus, with Commutativity, P ^ Q ^ P is equivalent to P ^ Q. 6) Idempotence of Disjunctions A disjunction P v P is equivalent to P. Thus, with Commutativity, P v Q v P is equivalent to P v Q. Section 4.6 – Conjunctive and Disjunctive Normal Forms Distributive laws: 1) Distribution of ^ over v: P ^ (Q v R) is logically equivalent to (P ^ Q) v (P ^ R) 2) Distribution of v over ^: P v (Q ^ R) is logically equivalent to (P v Q) ^ (P v R) Section 5.1 – Valid Inference Steps 1) Conjunction elimination (simplification) From P ^ Q, we can infer either P or Q. 2) Conjunction introduction From P and Q, we can infer P ^ Q. 3) Disjunction introduction (addition) From P, we can infer P v Q. Section 5.2 – Proof by Cases Disjunction elimination (proof by case): If our goal is S, and we have proven P v Q, then if
More Less

Related notes for PHIL 210

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit