I About the existence of Hamel basis for vector spaces

  • #31
A well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid. This defines the relation between (Semantic) truth and (Syntactic) provability. I'm not aware of how the term 'hold' is used, by there are wff's in Sentence Logic that are contingent. And, yes, every provable statement in FOL os Sentence Logic is a Tautology; true in every model.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
WWGD said:
A well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid. This defines the relation between (Semantic) truth and (Syntactic) provability. I'm not aware of how the term 'hold' is used, by there are wff's in Sentence Logic that are contingent. And, yes, every provable statement in FOL or Sentence Logic is a Tautology; true in every model.
Ok, a well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid since we're assuming a sound and (semantically) complete logic system (like FOL or Sentential (or propositional) logic are).

What does it mean that in Sentential logic there are contingent wffs ?
 
  • #33
cianfa72 said:
Ok, a well-formed formula (wff) is (syntactically) provable if and only if it is valid since we're assuming a sound and (semantically) complete logic system (like FOL or Sentential (or propositional) logic are).

What does it mean that in Sentential logic there are contingent wffs ?
Statements that aren't tautologies, like ##A \rightarrow B ##, which is not true when A is true and B is false.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K