Comparing Truth Tables: P→(Q→R) vs. (P→Q)→R

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mdhiggenz
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the comparison of two logical expressions: P→(Q→R) and (P→Q)→R. Participants clarify that these expressions yield different truth tables, emphasizing that the associative law does not apply to implications in propositional logic. The conclusion is that the two statements are distinct and cannot be rewritten to show equivalence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of propositional logic
  • Familiarity with truth tables
  • Knowledge of logical implications
  • Basic concepts of logical equivalence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of logical implications in propositional logic
  • Learn how to construct truth tables for complex logical expressions
  • Explore logical equivalences and their proofs
  • Investigate the differences between associative and other logical laws
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, logic enthusiasts, and anyone studying propositional logic and truth tables.

Mdhiggenz
Messages
324
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Hello, I was working on the following truth table problems
1.P→(Q→R)
2.(P→Q)→R

and wanted to know why I got different truth tables it seems that we could use the associative law to rewrite 1. in the same manner as 2.

Or am I missing something?

Thanks

Higgenz




Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
What "associative law" are you talking about? As far as I know there is no "associative law" for implications.

Here, these two statements are clearly not the same.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
2K