Deductive agruments in finite math: wrong answer in book?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Back2College
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Book Finite
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of a deductive argument in finite mathematics, specifically examining a logical structure involving implications and conjunctions. The original poster presents a truth table to assess the argument's validity, which contrasts with the answer provided in a textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to validate the argument using a truth table but questions whether their interpretation or the book's answer is incorrect. Other participants engage by clarifying the structure of truth tables and discussing the implications of the logical expressions presented.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing clarifications on the truth table format and addressing potential misunderstandings. There is no explicit consensus on the validity of the argument, but some guidance has been offered regarding the construction of truth tables.

Contextual Notes

Participants note discrepancies in the truth table values and question the implications of certain logical statements, indicating a need for clearer definitions and setups in the argument presented.

Back2College
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Identify the following as a valid or an invalid argument.

pq
qr
--------------

∴ ~r → ~p

Homework Equations



N/A

The Attempt at a Solution



Truth table values:

(a) pq TTFFTTTT
(b) qr TFFFTFFF
(c) a ∧ b TFFFTFFF
(d) ~r → ~p TFTFTTTT
(e) c → d TTTTTTTT

Since (e) is true in every case, the argument is valid. However, the answer in the back of the book says invalid.

Am I doing something wrong, or is the answer in the book wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Back2College said:
Am I doing something wrong, or is the answer in the book wrong?
I get your answer, but just from reasoning. You are given r and q are true, so the predicate not r leads to contradiction. A false predicate implies anything at all.
 
Back2College said:
a) pq TTFFTTTT
It's hard to tell what you mean by this and the other logical expressions you show.
For a truth table for ##p \Rightarrow q##, you need three columns: one for p, one for q, and one for the implication, like this:
##\begin{array} {ccc} \\ p & q & p \Rightarrow q \\
T & T & T \\
T & F & F \\
F & T & T \\
F & F & T \end{array}##
The only pair of values for p and q for which the implication is false is when p is true and q is false. In all other cases, the implication is true.

Edit: Miswrote something in my truth table, but now fixed.
 
Mark44 said:
It's hard to tell what you mean by this and the other logical expressions you show.
For a truth table for ##p \Rightarrow q##, you need three columns: one for p, one for q, and one for the implication, like this:
##\begin{array} {ccc} \\ p & q & p \Rightarrow q \\
T & T & T \\
T & F & F \\
F & T & T \\
F & F & F \end{array}##
The only pair of values for p and q for which the implication is false is when p is true and q is false. In all other cases, the implication is true.
Shouldn't the last line in the table read FFT?
 
haruspex said:
Shouldn't the last line in the table read FFT?
Yes -- now fixed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K