LOGIC proving/disproving general laws

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on evaluating two logical statements regarding implications and disjunctions. It is established that if "X implies Y," then the second statement, which claims the disjunction of X or Y is equivalent to Y, is true. The first statement, claiming the disjunction is equivalent to X, is proven false through a counterexample where X is false and Y is true. In this scenario, "X implies Y" holds true, but the disjunction does not equate to X. Thus, the conclusion is that statement (b) is correct while (a) is incorrect.
dburton
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
One of the following general laws is true, the other false. Prove the true one. Find a counter example to the other.(We must do this in writing out each statement, no truth tables or anything.

(a) If X implies Y, then the disjunction of X or Y is equivalent to X.
(b) If X implies Y, then the disjunction of X or Y is equivalent to Y.

I don't know, could you help me write out each step to prove/disprove?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dburton said:
One of the following general laws is true, the other false. Prove the true one. Find a counter example to the other.(We must do this in writing out each statement, no truth tables or anything.

(a) If X implies Y, then the disjunction of X or Y is equivalent to X.
(b) If X implies Y, then the disjunction of X or Y is equivalent to Y.

I don't know, could you help me write out each step to prove/disprove?

Okey. We have as an assumption "X implies Y". That means that either (1) X is false and Y is false, (2) X is false and Y is true, or (3) X is true and Y is true (because "X implies Y" is false if and only if X is true and Y is false). "[T]he disjunction of X or Y" (this is phrased a little funny) is false for (1) and true for (2) and (3). So we need to figure out if X or Y is similarly false for (1) and true for (2) and (3). That will be your answer. We see that Y satisfies these criteria, so (b) is the correct answer. A counterexample to (a) is the case where X is false and Y is true. Then "X implies Y" is true, but "the disjunction of X or Y" (true) is not equivalent to X (false).
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Back
Top