Logic - clarification needed about implication

by autodidude
Tags: clarification, implication, logic
autodidude is offline
Feb9-13, 10:47 AM
P: 333
If P→Q, and P is false but Q is true, then why is P→Q true? To me, it seems as though we shouldn't be able to do proceed because there isn't enough information. Same goes when P and Q are both false, how does that suggest P→Q is true?
Phys.Org News Partner Mathematics news on Phys.org
Math modeling handbook now available
Hyperbolic homogeneous polynomials, oh my!
Researchers help Boston Marathon organizers plan for 2014 race
mfb is offline
Feb9-13, 11:31 AM
P: 10,864
"If it rains, the street gets wet"
This statement is true, even if I spill water on the street (without rain).
More general: It cannot be false, if it does not rain. It just does not give any information about the street in that case.
AlephZero is offline
Feb9-13, 12:26 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 6,388
Another reason for those definitions is so that logic "works" the way it should, for every combination of "true" and "false".

For example, "P implies Q" means the same (in ordinary English) as "if P is true, then Q is true", which means the same as "if Q is false, then P is false".

So the truth table for P→Q must be the same as for (not Q)→(not P),

That means P→Q must be defined as true, when P and Q are both false.

You can create a similar argument to show how P→Q must be defined with P is false and Q is true.

Bacle2 is offline
Feb9-13, 12:54 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 1,168

Logic - clarification needed about implication

See the bottom half of :


i.e., the section on philosophical problems.



Register to reply

Related Discussions
A question about implication in logic Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 14
Clarification needed Calculus & Beyond Homework 12
Implication (Discrete math logic) General Math 11
LOGIC: A Request for Clarification of definitions General Discussion 4
Predicate logic implication and quantifiers Engineering, Comp Sci, & Technology Homework 0