1.

Sets, Relations, and Arguments

1.1.A set is a binary relation iff it contains only ordered pairs.
1.2.A binary relation R is
1.2.1. reflexive on a set S iff for all elements d of S the pair d,d is an element of R
1.2.2. symmetric on a set S iff for all elements d, e of S: if d,e R then e,d R
1.2.3. asymmetric on a set S iff for no elements d, e of S: d,e R and e,d R
1.2.4. antisymmetric on a set S iff for no two distinct elements d, e of S: d,e R and
e,d R
1.2.5. transitive on a set S iff for all elments d, e, f of S: if d,e R and e, f R then
d, f R
1.3. A binary relation R is
1.3.1. symmetric iff it is symmetric on all sets
1.3.2. asymmetric iff it is asymmetric on all sets
1.3.3. antisymmetric iff it is antisymmetric on all sets
1.3.4. transitive iff it is transitive on all sets
1.4. A binary relation R is an equivalence relation on S iff R is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive
on S
1.5. A binary relation R is a function iff for all d, e, f: if d,e R and d, f R then e = f
1.6. Functions
1.6.1. The domain of a function R is the set {d: there is an e such that d,e R }
1.6.2. The range of a function R is the set {e: there is a d such that d,e R }
1.6.3. R is a function into the set M iff all elements of the range of the function are in M
1.7. If d is in the domain of a function R one writes R(d) for the unique object e such that d,e R
1.8. An argument consists of a set of declarative sentences (premises) and a declarative sentence
(conclusion) marked as the concluded sentence.
1.9. An argument is logically valid iff there is no interpretation under which the premises are all true
and the conclusion is false.
1.10. A set of sentences is logically consistent iff there is at least one interpretation under which all
sentences of the set are true.
1.11. A sentence is logically true iff it is true under any interpretation.
1.12. A sentence is a contradiction iff it is false under all interpretations.
1.13. Sentences are logically equivalent iff they are true under exactly the same interpretations.
2. Syntax and Semantics of Propositional Logic
2.1. P,Q, R, P1 ,Q1 , R1 , P2 ,Q2 ... are sentence letters
2.2. Sentences
2.2.1. All sentence letters are sentences of L1
2.2.2. If and are sentences of L1 then , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , and ( ) are
sentences of L1
2.2.3. Nothing else is a sentence of L1
2.3. An L1-structure is an assignment of exactly one truth value (T or F) to every sentence letter of
L1
 2.4. Truth: let A be some L1-structure. Then ||A assigns either T or F to every sentence of L1 in
the following way.
2.4.1. If is a sentence letter, A is the truth-value assigned to by L1-structure A.
2.4.2. A = T iff A = F
2.4.3. A
= T iff A = T and A
=T
2.4.4. A
= T iff A = T or A
=T
2.4.5. A
= T iff A = F or A
=T
2.4.6. A = T iff A = A
2.5. Truth etc.
2.5.1. A sentence of L1 is logically true if and only if is true in all L1-structures.
2.5.2. A sentence of L1 is a contradiction if and only if is not true in any L1-structure.
2.5.3. A sentence and a sentence are logically equivalent if and only if both are true in
exactly the same L1-structures.
2.6. Let be a set of sentences of L1 and a sentence of L1. The argument with all sentences in
as premises and as conclusion is valid iff there is no L1-structure in which all sentences in
are true and is false.
2.7. An L1-structure is a counterexample to the argument with all sentences in as premises and
as conclusion iff A = T for all and A = F
2.8. A set of sentences is semantically consistent iff there is an L1-structure A such that A = T
for all sentences of . Semantic inconsistency is the opposite.
2.9. If and all elements of are sentences, then the following obtains: ! iff the set containing
all sentences in and is semantically inconsistent.
3. Formalization
3.1. A connective is truth-functional iff the truth-value of the compound sentence cannot be
changed by replacing a direct subsentence with another sentence having the same truth-value.
3.2. The scope of an occurrence of a connective in a sentence of L1 is the occurrence of the
smallest subsentence of that constains this occurrence of the connective.
3.3. English sentences:
3.3.1. An English sentence is a tautology iff its formalization in propositional logic is logically
true.
3.3.2. An English sentence is a propositional contradiction iff its formalization in
propositional logic is a contradicitons.
3.3.3. A set of English sentences is propositionally consistent if the set of all their
formalizations in propositional logic is semantically consistent.
3.4. An argument in English is propositionally valid iff its formalization in L1 is valid.
4. The Syntax of Predicate Logic
4.1. All expressions of the form Pnk ,Qnk , Rnk are predicate letters, where k is either missing or a
numeral, and n is either missing or a numeral.
4.2. The value of the upper index of a predicate letter is called its arity. If a predicate letter does not
have an upper index its arity is 0.
4.3. a,b,c,a1 ,b1 ,c1 ,a2 .... are constants.
 4.4. x, y, z, x1 , y1 , z1 , x2 ... are variables
4.5. If Z is a predicate letter of arit n and each of t1 ...t n is a variable or a constant, then Zt1 ...t n is an
atomic formula of L2
4.6. A quantifier is an expression v or v where v is a variable.
4.7. Formulae
4.7.1. All atomic formulae are formulae of L2.
4.7.2. If and are formulae of L2 then , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , and ( ) are
sentences of L2.
4.7.3. If v is a variable and is a formula, the v and v are formulae of L2.
4.8. Variables
4.8.1. All occurrences of variables in atomic formulae are free.
4.8.2. The occurrences of a variable that are free in and are also free in
, ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , and ( )
4.8.3. In a formula v or v no occurrence of the variable v is free; all occurrences of
variables other than v that are free in are also free in v and v .
5. The Semantics of Predicate Logic
5.1. An L2-Structure is an ordered pair D, I where D is some non-empty set and I is a function
from the set of all constants, sentence letters, and predicate letters such that the value of every
constant is an element of D, the value of ever sentence letter is a truth-value T or F, and the
value of every n-ary predicate letter is an n-ary relation.
5.2. A variable assignment over and L2 structure A assigns an element of the domain of A to each
variable.
5.3. Satisfaction: Assume A is an L2-strucuter, is a variable assignment over A, and are

formulae of L2, and v is a variable. For a formula either A = T or A = F obtains.
Formulae other than sentence letters then receive the following semantic values.

5.3.1. t1 ...t n A = T iff t1 A ... t n A
A , where is an n-ary predicate letter, and each of
t1 ...t n is either a variable or a constant.
5.3.2. See 2.4.2-2.4.6

5.3.3. v A = T iff A = T for all variable assignments over A differing from in v at most.

5.3.4. v A = T iff A = T for at least one variable assignment over A differing from in v at most.

5.4. A sentence is true in an L2-strucutre A iff A = T for all variable assignments over A.
5.5. Truth
5.5.1. A sentence of L2 is logically true iff it is true in all L2-structures.
5.5.2. A sentence of L2 is a contradiction iff it is not true in any L2-structure.
5.5.3. Two sentences are logically equivalent if both are true in exactly the same L2 structure.
5.5.4. A sentence is semantically consistent iff there is an L2=structure A in which all
sentences in are true. A sentence is semantically inconsistent iff it is not semantically
consistent.
 5.6. Let be a set of L2 sentences and a sentence of L2. The argument with all sentences in as
premises and as conclusion iff there is no L2-structure in which all sentences in are true
and is false.
5.7. A counterexample can be used to show a sentence not to be logically ture by giving an L2
structure under which it has the truth value F.
6. Natural Deduction: see appendix.
7. Formalization in Predicate Logic
7.1. If an argument is provable in deduction ( ) then it is valid ( ! ). If it is valid, then it is
provable. These lemmas are called soundness and completeness.
7.1.1. Together they are called the adequacy theorem.
7.2. A set of L2-sentences is syntactically consistent iff there is a sentence such that is not
provable from .
7.3. A set of L2-sentences is semantically consistent iff is syntactically consistent.
7.4. The scope of an occurrence of a quantifier or a connective in a sentence of L2 is the occurrence
of the smallest L2-formula that contains that occurrence of the quantifier or connective and is
part of the sentence.
7.5. English truth.
7.5.1. An English sentence is logically true in predicate logic iff its formalization in predicate
logic is logically true.
7.5.2. An English sentence is a contradiction in predicate logic iff its formalization in predicate
logic is a contradiction.
7.5.3. A set of English sentences is consistent in predicate logic iff an only if the set of their
formalizations in predicate logics is semantically consistent.
7.6. An argument in English is valid in predicate logic iff its formalization in the language L2 of
predicate logic is valid.
8. Identity and Definite Descriptions (L=)
8.1. All atomic formulae of L2 are atomic formulae of L=. Furthermore, if s and t are variables or
constants, then s=t. is an atomic formula of L=.
8.2. Formulae
8.2.1. All atomic formulae of L= are formulae of L=.
8.2.2. If If and are formulae of L= then , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , and ( ) are
sentences of L=
8.2.3. If v is a variable and is a formula of L= then v and v are formulae of L=.
8.2.4. Adequacy holds in L=.