 #1
 1,011
 0
Is the statment "if you are a comedian then you are funny." equivalent to what is defined in part (a)?
Attachments

4.7 KB Views: 255
Correct. This is how in mathematical logic we express a statement like "all X are Y". You cannot express this directly, because you would have to say something like "Let ##C## be the set of all comedians. Then ##\forall x \in C, F(x)##. Unfortunately, in logic, a forall symbol always runs over the entire universe  in this case, all people, so once you write ##\forall x## you imply ##\forall x \in X## and the qualification over ##C## is invalid.The statements says all comedians are funny. The reason why I am asking the question is because to me the symbolic expression in the paint document which expresses that "All comedians are funny" implies that if you are a comedian then you must be funny.
So what I am saying, that "all comedians are funny" and "if you are a comedian then you are funny" are equivalent.
C(x) F(x) (1): C(x)>F(x) (2): ... (3): ...
T T ....
T F
F T
F F