11/1/2016

Critical Thinking

Chapter 10
A Little Propositional Logic

Lecture Notes © 2008 McGraw Hill Higher 1

Education

Propositional logic
It is often difficult to determine whether a long and
complex argument is valid or invalid just by reading it.
Example:
 If the Democrat loses the Senate race, the
Republicans will have a majority in the Senate.
 If the Republicans have a majority in the Senate, the
Senate will vote down the new bill.
 It is not the case that the Senate will vote down the
new bill or the Democrat will lose the Senate race.
 So, it is not the case that if the Democrat does not
lose, the Senate will not vote down the new bill

1
 11/1/2016

Symbolization

Propositional logic is the way to symbolize the parts of

arguments so that we can analyze the whole arguments
for validity.
When you symbolize an argument, you represent its
simple statements with single letters, and then represent
the relationship between them (that the argument
suggests) with symbols.

Symbolization

Example: If Bush won we’re all going to die. Bush won.

Therefore we are all going to die.
 Where:
 b = Bush won
 d = We’re all going to die
 The argument gets symbolized like this:
1. b  d
2. b
3.  d
“” means “Therefore”

2
 11/1/2016

Conjunction and validity

 When two simple statements are conjoined with an
“and,” we call it a “conjunction.”
 We represent each statement as a simple letter, and
represent the “and” with an “&.”
 Example:
 “Tina is tall and Sarah is tall.” gets symbolized like this:
p&q
 p = Tina is tall
 q = Sarah is tall

Other words for “and”

 If you see any of the following words, treat them like
“and” and symbolize the statement with an “&”:
 but, yet, while, whereas, although, though, however.
 They are different in meanings, but functionally similar.
 Note: What letter you give it really doesn’t matter, just
as long as you are consistent (use the same letter for
that statement every time) and don’t use the same
letter for two different statements in the same
argument.

3
 11/1/2016

Other words for “and”

 Be warned: not every statement with “and” in it is
compound.
Example: The Knicks and Bulls are playing each other.
 This is not expressing the facts that each team is
playing…
 Mistake: The Knicks are playing and the Bulls are
playing (i.e., k & b).
 …it is expressing the single fact that the two teams
are playing each other.
 So it would just get a single letter, for instance, “e.”

Truth Tables
 When evaluating validity, you don’t worry
about the truth value of the statements you
are symbolizing.
 But each statement is either true or false (you
just don’t know which).
 Truth Tables allow you to evaluate statements
and arguments without knowing truth values
by representing all possible truth value
combinations.
8

4
 11/1/2016

Truth Tables
 Recall, we symbolized “Tina is tall and Sarah is tall” as “p&q”.
 We don’t know if they are or not, but we can represent all
possibilities this way:

p q p&q
---------- ---------- ----------
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
Notice: what “p&q” means is “both p and q are true.” This means that, unless both p and
q are true, “p&q” will not be true. That is why, above, p&q has a T only on the row on9
which both p and q both have a T as well.

Using Truth Tables to Examine

Validity
 Since….
 …an argument is invalid only when it is possible for its
premises to be true and the conclusion false…
 …and since truth tables show us all possible truth values
 …we can use truth tables to evaluate validity.
 We use them to determine all the possible truth
values, and then look for a row where all the
premise are true but the conclusion is false.
 If we find one, the argument is invalid
 If there is no such row, the argument is valid.
10

5
 11/1/2016

Example
 (1) Tina is tall.
 (2) Sarah is tall.
 (3) Therefore, Tina and Sarah are tall.
Symbolized: p, q.  q.
First, represent all the statement letters and their truth values.

p q Notice:
------ ------ First row: two T’s, two F’s,
T T
Second row: one T, one F (repeat)
T F
F T
F F
11

Example
 Then, add the premises and the conclusion.

p q p* q* p&q (C)
------ ------ ---------- ---------- ----------
T T
T F
F T
F F
12

6
 11/1/2016

Example
 Then, add the truth values.

p q p* q* p&q (C)
------ ------ ---------- ---------- ----------
T T T T T
T F T F F
F T F T F
F F F F F
13

Example
Then look for rows where the premises are all true, and see if the
conclusion is false on those rows. If there is such a row, then the
argument is invalid. In this case, the only row with all true premises
is one in which the conclusion is also true. Thus, the argument is
valid.

p q p* q* p&q (C)
------ ------ ---------- ---------- ----------
T T T T T  Valid

T F T F F
F T F T F
F F F F F
14

7
 11/1/2016

More Examples
1. Grass is green.
2. Therefore, grass is green and the sky is blue.
Symbolized: g  g & s
g s g* g&s (c)
------ ------ ------ ------
T T T T 

T F T F  Shows it
to be
F T F F invalid

F F F F
Since, on the second row, the premise is true but the conclusion is false, the argument
15 is
invalid.

Negation
 We can easily represent “negated
statements” with a “~” (tilde).
 If “Sarah is tall” is “p”
 “Sarah is not tall” is “~p”
 On a truth table:
 anywhere p has a T
 ~p will have an F

16

8
 11/1/2016

Example:
 (1) Tina is not Tall, but Sarah is tall. So, Tina is not tall.
 Symbolized: ~p, q ~p
p q ~p* q* ~p (C)
------ ------ ---------- ---------- ----------
T T F T F
T F F F F
F T T T T  Valid
F F T F T
The argument is valid. The only row on which both premises are true is a row on which
the conclusion is also true.
17

Another example
 Argument: Frank does not drive a truck. Therefore,
Frank doesn’t drive a truck and Vinny doesn’t drive
a minivan. Symbolized: ~f ~f & ~v

f v ~v ~f* (~f & ~v) (c)

--- --- --- ---------- ----------
T T F F fFf

T F T F f Ft

F T F T tFf  invalid
F F T T tT t

Argument is invalid. Row 3 is an example of a row with true premises but a false 18

conclusion.

9
 11/1/2016

Whole statement negations

 Not only can individual statements be negated:
~p
 Compound statements can be too: ~(p&q)
 Since “p&q” means “Both p and q are true”
 “~(p&q)” means “It is false that both p and q are
true.”

19

Whole statement negations

 But don’t distribute (like in math):
 ~(p&q) is not the same as (~p & ~q)
 Why?
 ~(p&q) means they are not both true (at
least one is false)
 (~p & ~q) means they are both false

20

10
 11/1/2016

Proof: ~(p&q) ≠ (~p & ~q)

p q ~p ~q p&q ~ (p&q) ~p & ~q
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -----
T T F F T F F
T F F T F T F
F T T F F T F
F F T T F T T

21

Truth tables with 3 variables

(set up)
p q r Notice:
Third column, one T, one F (repeat)
---- ---- ----
Second column, two T’s, Two F’s (repeat)
T T T
First column, four T’s, four F’s
T T F
T F T
T F F
F T T
F T F
F F T
F F F 22

11
 11/1/2016

Argument: p, ~q & r, p & r

p q r p* (~q & r)* (p & r) (c)
--- --- --- ----------- ---------------- ------------
T T T T fFt tT t
T T F T fFf tFf
T F T T tTt tTt  Valid
T F F T tFf tFf
because the
only row
F T T F fFt fFt with true
premises
F T F F fFf fFf also has a
true
F F T F tT t fFt conclusion.
F F F F tFf fFf 23

Argument: ~(p&q), (~q&r) ~p

p q r ~(p&q)* (~q & r)* ~p (c)
--- --- --- ----------- ---------------- ------------
T T T F t fFt F
T T F F t fFf F
T F T T f  Shows it
tTt F
is invalid
T F F T f tFf F
F T T T f fFt T
F T F T f fFf T
F F T T f  Even
tT t T
though
F F F T f tFf T
24

12
 11/1/2016

Disjunctions (or statements)

“Frank is angry or Hank is tired.”
gets symbolized: a v t
(To make things easier, don’t ever use the letter “v”
to symbolize a simple statement.)
Exclusive and inclusive “or”:
Exclusive or: “a or b” means “a or b, but not both.”
Inclusive or: “a or b” means “at least a or b, but
maybe both.”
The convention is to use the inclusive sense. So….

25

Disjunction truth tables

p q pvq

--- --- ----

T T T

T F T

F T T

F F F
26

13
 11/1/2016

Argument: pvq p
p q pvq* p (C)

--- --- ---- ----

T T T T

T F T T

F T T F  Invalid

F F F F
27

Be careful with negations of

disjunctions
 Frank is angry or Hank is tired.  a v t
 Frank is not angry or Hank is tired.  ~a v t
 Frank is not angry or Hank is not tired.  ~a v ~t
 It’s not the case that Frank is angry or Hank is tired.
 ~(a v t)
 Neither is Frank angry nor is Hank tired.  ~(a v t)
These last two are the same as “Frank is not angry and
Hank is not tired.”
(~a & ~t)
28

14
 11/1/2016

Proof: ~(pvq)  ~p&~q

p q ~(pvq) ~p&~q

--- --- -------- ---------

T T F t fFf

T F F t fFt

F T F t tFf

F F T f tTt

  29

look they match

Conditional
(if, then) statements
“If it rained then the ground is wet.”
Where:
 r = it rained
 w = the ground is wet
rw
“r” is the antecedent
“w” is the consequent

Lecture Notes © 2008 McGraw Hill Higher 30

Education

15
 11/1/2016

Conditional truth tables

 Truth table is tricky. “pq”
means “every time p is true, p q pq
q is true.”
 Or “when p is true, q is --- --- ------
true.”
T T T
 So, only when the
antecedent is true and the
consequent false, is it the  T F F
case that the conditional is
false. F T T
 If this confuses you, don’t
worry… It is confusing. Just
remember it. F F T

31

Be careful with negation and

conditionals
 If it did not rain, then the game was played.
 ~rp
 If it did not rain, then the game was not
played.
 ~r  ~p
 It is not the case that, if it rained then the
game was played.
 ~(rp)
 These all have different meanings.
32

16
 11/1/2016

Be careful with negation and

conditionals
p q pq ~pq ~p~q ~(pq)

--- --- ----- -------- --------- ----------

T T T fTt fTf F t

T F F fTf fTt T f

F T T tT t tFf F t

F F T tF f tTt F t

33

Argument:
~(pq), (q v r)  (qp)
p q r ~(pq)* (q v r)* (qp) (C)
--- --- --- ---------- ------- -------
T T T F t tTt tT t
T T F F t tTf tT t
T F T T f  Valid
f Tt fTt
because the
T F F T f f Ff fTt only row with
true premises
F T T F t tTt tFf also has a
true
F T F F t tTf tFf conclusion
F F T F t fTt fTf
F F F F t f Ff fTf 34

17