Validity Using Euler Circles and Truth Tables

  • Thread starter Thread starter kma27
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circles Euler
AI Thread Summary
Truth tables can be effectively used alongside Euler circles to determine the validity of logical arguments. The discussion highlights how to translate statements involving sets into logical expressions using basic connectives and negation. Two specific arguments are presented for analysis: one involving the relationship between sets A, B, and C, and the other focusing on the implications of set memberships. Participants express confusion about how to initiate the problem-solving process for these arguments. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in translating and validating logical statements through both Euler circles and truth tables.
kma27
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm so confused on how to tackle this problem:



1. Truth tables are related to Euler circles. Arguments in the form of Euler circles can be translated into statements using the basic connectives and the negation as follows:



Let p be “The object belongs to set A. “Let q be “the object belongs to set B.”


All A is B is equivalent to p -> q.

No A is B is equivalent to p ->~ q.

Some A is B is equivalent to p ^ q.

Some A is not B is equivalent to p ^ ~q.


Determine the validity of the next arguments by using Euler circles, then translate the statements into logical statements using the basic connectives, and using truth tables, determine the validity of the arguments. Compare your answers.


(a). No A is B.
Some C is A.
___________
Therefore Some C is not B.


(b) All B is A.
All C is A.
__________
Therefore All C is B.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
?? What do you want help with? What have you done on (a) and (b)?
 
I am having the same problem with that same problem.
 
this question has me stumped also. I do not know the first step to getting started. any help will be greatly appreciated. thanks
 
Last edited:
Back
Top