Is Modus Ponens Applicable in Logical Deductions Involving Quantifiers?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter darkchild
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of Modus Ponens in logical deductions involving quantifiers, specifically in the context of predicate logic. It is established that if Δ proves ∀vP, and there exists an axiom scheme ∀vP → P(t/v), then Modus Ponens can be applied to derive P(t/v) from these premises. The participants clarify that this application follows the same principles as traditional Modus Ponens, reinforcing its validity in logical deductions involving quantifiers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of predicate logic and quantifiers
  • Familiarity with Modus Ponens and its application
  • Knowledge of axiom schemes in formal logic
  • Basic concepts of logical deduction and inference rules
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of predicate logic and quantifiers
  • Review detailed examples of Modus Ponens in logical proofs
  • Explore axiom schemes and their role in formal logic
  • Investigate the relationship between Modus Ponens and other inference rules
USEFUL FOR

Logicians, mathematicians, and students of formal logic seeking to deepen their understanding of logical deductions involving quantifiers and the application of Modus Ponens.

darkchild
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
P is a one-place predicate, t is a constant, v is a variable of P. P(t/v) denotes replacing v by t in P.

In the proof of a theorem, it is given that

Δ\vdash\forallvP.
(meaning \forallvP is deduced from the set of statements Δ.)

There exists an axiom scheme

\vdash\forall[/itex]vP\rightarrow(P(t/v).

Then modus ponens is applied to these two to prove that

Δ\vdashP(t/v).

I've never seen modus ponens applied to a deduction and it is used with so I scarcely know what to ask...how is this permissible? How does it work...same as regular modus ponens? Is there a proof that this is shows this is the same as modus ponens, or a definition that describes it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The axiom scheme should be

\vdash\forallv→P(t/v).

Also, the last paragraph of my original post should say "it is used without explanation, so I scarcely know what to ask." Meaning give me whatever relevant information you've got.
 
This is a day late and a dollar short since your question is from November but ...

I think the axiom scheme should be ∀vP→P(t/v) so we are given the following as premises:

∀vP
∀vP→P(t/v)

notice that this has the form
1. A
2. A→B

Modus ponens is the rule that says that given 1 and 2 we may infer B, i.e., P(t/v)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 132 ·
5
Replies
132
Views
16K