Conditional Statments and Truth Value

toboldlygo
Messages
32
Reaction score
2
So, I know that P ⊃ Q is a true statement even if P is false as long as Q is true. However, I don't understand why that is, or how that is logically sound. Is it because I'm stuck in thinking of these types of statements as "If P, then Q," and they are not supposed to be thought of that way? How else can I approach this to have it make logical sense to me? Thanks. Also, I'm sorry if this is supposed to go to the HW section (I thought this fit here); please let me know and I'll move it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Given the statement P⊂Q (i.e., the elements of the set P are contained in the set Q),
it is not illogical to have an event where P is false and Q is true.

It could be the case that there are multiple elements in the set Q that are not also in the set P.
If that were the case, than an event could be in Q and not in P.
 
  • Like
Likes toboldlygo
toboldlygo said:
So, I know that P ⊃ Q is a true statement even if P is false as long as Q is true. However, I don't understand why that is, or how that is logically sound. Is it because I'm stuck in thinking of these types of statements as "If P, then Q," and they are not supposed to be thought of that way? How else can I approach this to have it make logical sense to me? Thanks. Also, I'm sorry if this is supposed to go to the HW section (I thought this fit here); please let me know and I'll move it.

If the moon is blue then the Earth is round.
If the moon is not blue then the Earth is round.
THEREFORE
The Earth is round.
If the first statement were false, then the deduction wouldn't follow.
 
jfizzix said:
Given the statement P⊂Q (i.e., the elements of the set P are contained in the set Q),
it is not illogical to have an event where P is false and Q is true.
I really like thinking of it this way! Would it be accurate, then, for me to think of it like this: if P = {a, b, c} and Q = {P, d}, then P can be false even if Q is true?
 
See also the paradox of the material conditional. There are modal operators where ## p \rightarrow q## only if q can be derived logically from p.
 
toboldlygo said:
I really like thinking of it this way! Would it be accurate, then, for me to think of it like this: if P = {a, b, c} and Q = {P, d}, then P can be false even if Q is true?
Yes.
 
  • Like
Likes toboldlygo
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top