Conditional Statments and Truth Value

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 1K views
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   Reactions: 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?