false

Study Guides
(248,228)

Canada
(121,418)

McGill University
(4,982)

Philosophy
(114)

PHIL 210
(3)

n/a
(2)

Midterm

Unlock Document

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

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study

documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view

Continue

Continue
OR

By registering, I agree to the
Terms
and
Privacy Policies

Already have an account?
Log in

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.