Symbolic Logic Definitions and Rules: A Concise Study Guide, Exams of Philosophy

A concise overview of key definitions and concepts in symbolic logic, particularly focusing on first-order logic (fol). It covers topics such as validity, contradiction, equivalence, and satisfiability, offering clear definitions and practical guidelines for determining these properties. Additionally, it includes quantifier conversion rules, common fol phrases, and tricky fol phrases, making it a useful resource for students studying logic. The document also touches on provability, theorem definitions, and various logical rules like disjunction syllogism, modus tollens, and demorgan's law. It serves as a quick reference guide for understanding and applying fundamental principles in symbolic logic, aiding in the construction and evaluation of logical arguments and derivations. It also includes examples of how to translate common english phrases into fol.

Typology: Exams

2024/2025

Available from 07/28/2025

Upstudy
Upstudy 🇺🇸

2.8

(9)

14K documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
PHI 112 SYMBOL LOGIC TEST
RECENTLY UPDATED
validity definition - ANSWER *A* is a validity iff *A* is true in every
interpretation (i.e. *A*)
contradiction definition - ANSWER *A* is a contradiction iff *A* is false in
every interpretation (i.e. ~*A*)
valid in FOL definition - ANSWER *A1, A2, . . , An* *C* is valid in FOL
iff there is no interpretation in which all the premises are true and the
conclusion is false (i.e. *A1, A2, . . , An* *C*)
invalid in FOL definition - ANSWER *A1, A2, . . , An* *C* is invalid in
FOL iff there there is an interpretation in which all the premises are true and the
conclusion is false
equivalent definition - ANSWER Two FOL sentences *A* and *B* are
equivalent iff they are true in exactly the same interpretations as each other (i.e.
*A* *B* and *B* *A*)
jointly satisfiable definition - ANSWER The FOL sentences *A1, A2, . . , An*
are jointly satisfiable iff some interpretation makes all of them true
jointly unsatisfiable definition - ANSWER The FOL sentences *A1, A2, . . ,
An* are jointly unsatisfiable iff there is not an interpretation that makes all of
them true
To show *A* is not a validity: - ANSWER Find an interpretation where *A* is
false
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Symbolic Logic Definitions and Rules: A Concise Study Guide and more Exams Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

PHI 112 SYMBOL LOGIC TEST

RECENTLY UPDATED

validity definition - ANSWER A is a validity iff A is true in every interpretation (i.e. ⊨ A) contradiction definition - ANSWER A is a contradiction iff A is false in every interpretation (i.e. ⊨ ~A) valid in FOL definition - ANSWER A1, A2,.. , AnC is valid in FOL iff there is no interpretation in which all the premises are true and the conclusion is false (i.e. A1, A2,.. , AnC) invalid in FOL definition - ANSWER A1, A2,.. , AnC is invalid in FOL iff there there is an interpretation in which all the premises are true and the conclusion is false equivalent definition - ANSWER Two FOL sentences A and B are equivalent iff they are true in exactly the same interpretations as each other (i.e. AB and BA) jointly satisfiable definition - ANSWER The FOL sentences A1, A2,.. , An are jointly satisfiable iff some interpretation makes all of them true jointly unsatisfiable definition - ANSWER The FOL sentences A1, A2,.. , An are jointly unsatisfiable iff there is not an interpretation that makes all of them true To show A is not a validity: - ANSWER Find an interpretation where A is false

To show A is not a contradiction: - ANSWER Find an interpretation where A is true To show A and B are not logically equivalent: - ANSWER Find an interpretation where A is true and B is false (or vice versa) ∴ jointly unsatisfiable To show A and B are jointly satisfiable: - ANSWER Find an interpretation where A and B are true; ∴ logically equivalent provability definition - ANSWER A and B are a provability iff AB theorem definition - ANSWER A is a theorem iff ⊢ A provably inconsistent definition - ANSWER A1, A2,.. , An are provably inconsistent iff A1, A2,.. , An ⊢ ⊥ provably equivalent definition - ANSWER A and B are provably equivalent iff AB and BA When to provide an interpretation versus a derivation: - ANSWER Use an interpretation to show an argument is invalid; Use a derivation to show an argument is valid; Tip: try to find an interpretation first quantifier conversion rules - ANSWER ~∃xG(x) ↔ ∀x~G(x) ∃x~G(x) ↔ ~∀xG(x) ~∃x~G(x) ↔ ∀xG(x) ∃xG(x) ↔ ~∀x~G(x) CQ i,j disjunction syllogism (DS) definition - ANSWER A / B ~A ∴ B A / B ~B ∴ A DS i,j

"Not all As are Bs" "No As are Bs" - ANSWER ∀x(Ax->Bx) ∃x(Ax/\Bx) ~∀x(Ax->Bx) or ∃x(Ax/~Bx) ~ ∃x(Ax/\Bx) or ∀x(Ax->~Bx) tricky FOL phrase: "Only a owes b x" O(x,y): x owes y - ANSWER ∀x( O(x,b) - > a=x ) or ∀x( ~a=x - > O(a,x) ) or ~∃x( ~a=x /\ O(a,x) ) tricky FOL phrases: "There's at least one apple" "There's at least two apples" - ANSWER ∃xA(x) ∃x∃y(Ax/\Ay/~x=y) tricky FOL phrases: "There's at most one apple" "There's at most two apples" - ANSWER ∀x∀y((Ax/\Ay)->x=y) ∀x∀y∀z((Ax/\Ay/\Az)->(x=y/x=z/y=z)) tricky FOL phrases: "There's exactly one apple" "There's exactly two apples" - ANSWER ∃x(Ax/\ ∀y(Ay->x=y)) ∃x∃y(Ax/\Ay/~(x=y)/\∀z(Az->(x=z/y=z)) tricky FOL phrases: "The frog is on the lily pad" - ANSWER ∃x( Fx /\ ∀y(Fy->y=x) ) /\ ∃z( Lz /
∀y(Fy->z=y) /\ Oxz ) review - ANSWER ch37: symmetric and transitive proof of identities