|
Universal Generalization
In predicate logic, generalization (also universal generalization or universal introduction,Moore and Parker GEN) is a valid inference rule. It states that if \vdash \!P(x) has been derived, then \vdash \!\forall x \, P(x) can be derived. Generalization with hypotheses The full generalization rule allows for hypotheses to the left of the turnstile, but with restrictions. Assume \Gamma is a set of formulas, \varphi a formula, and \Gamma \vdash \varphi(y) has been derived. The generalization rule states that \Gamma \vdash \forall x \, \varphi(x) can be derived if y is not mentioned in \Gamma and x does not occur in \varphi. These restrictions are necessary for soundness. Without the first restriction, one could conclude \forall x P(x) from the hypothesis P(y). Without the second restriction, one could make the following deduction: #\exists z \, \exists w \, ( z \not = w) (Hypothesis) #\exists w \, (y \not = w) (Existential instantiation) #y \not = x (Existential instantiation) # ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Rule Of Inference
In the philosophy of logic, a rule of inference, inference rule or transformation rule is a logical form consisting of a function which takes premises, analyzes their syntax, and returns a conclusion (or conclusions). For example, the rule of inference called '' modus ponens'' takes two premises, one in the form "If p then q" and another in the form "p", and returns the conclusion "q". The rule is valid with respect to the semantics of classical logic (as well as the semantics of many other non-classical logics), in the sense that if the premises are true (under an interpretation), then so is the conclusion. Typically, a rule of inference preserves truth, a semantic property. In many-valued logic, it preserves a general designation. But a rule of inference's action is purely syntactic, and does not need to preserve any semantic property: any function from sets of formulae to formulae counts as a rule of inference. Usually only rules that are recursive are important; i.e. ru ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
 |
Predicate Logic
First-order logic—also known as predicate logic, quantificational logic, and first-order predicate calculus—is a collection of formal systems used in mathematics, philosophy, linguistics, and computer science. First-order logic uses quantified variables over non-logical objects, and allows the use of sentences that contain variables, so that rather than propositions such as "Socrates is a man", one can have expressions in the form "there exists x such that x is Socrates and x is a man", where "there exists''"'' is a quantifier, while ''x'' is a variable. This distinguishes it from propositional logic, which does not use quantifiers or relations; in this sense, propositional logic is the foundation of first-order logic. A theory about a topic is usually a first-order logic together with a specified domain of discourse (over which the quantified variables range), finitely many functions from that domain to itself, finitely many predicates defined on that domain, and a set ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.svg "Click for more on -> Validity (logic)") |
Validity (logic)
In logic, specifically in deductive reasoning, an argument is valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. It is not required for a valid argument to have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion. Valid arguments must be clearly expressed by means of sentences called well-formed formulas (also called ''wffs'' or simply ''formulas''). The validity of an argument can be tested, proved or disproved, and depends on its logical form. Arguments In logic, an argument is a set of statements expressing the ''premises'' (whatever consists of empirical evidences and axiomatic truths) and an ''evidence-based conclusion.'' An argument is ''valid'' if and only if it would be contradictory for the conclusion to be false if all of the premises are true. Validity doesn't require the truth of the premises, ins ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
Rule Of Inference
In the philosophy of logic, a rule of inference, inference rule or transformation rule is a logical form consisting of a function which takes premises, analyzes their syntax, and returns a conclusion (or conclusions). For example, the rule of inference called '' modus ponens'' takes two premises, one in the form "If p then q" and another in the form "p", and returns the conclusion "q". The rule is valid with respect to the semantics of classical logic (as well as the semantics of many other non-classical logics), in the sense that if the premises are true (under an interpretation), then so is the conclusion. Typically, a rule of inference preserves truth, a semantic property. In many-valued logic, it preserves a general designation. But a rule of inference's action is purely syntactic, and does not need to preserve any semantic property: any function from sets of formulae to formulae counts as a rule of inference. Usually only rules that are recursive are important; i.e. ru ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Turnstile (symbol)
In mathematical logic and computer science the symbol \vdash has taken the name turnstile because of its resemblance to a typical turnstile if viewed from above. It is also referred to as tee and is often read as "yields", "proves", "satisfies" or "entails". Interpretations The turnstile represents a binary relation. It has several different interpretations in different contexts: * In epistemology, Per Martin-Löf (1996) analyzes the \vdash symbol thus: "... e combination of Frege's , judgement stroke and , content stroke �� came to be called the assertion sign." Frege's notation for a judgement of some content ::\vdash A :can then be read ::''I know is true''. :In the same vein, a conditional assertion ::P \vdash Q :can be read as: ::''From , I know that '' * In metalogic, the study of formal languages; the turnstile represents syntactic consequence (or "derivability"). This is to say, that it shows that one string can be derived from another in a single step, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Universal Instantiation
In predicate logic, universal instantiation (UI; also called universal specification or universal elimination, and sometimes confused with '' dictum de omni'') is a valid rule of inference from a truth about each member of a class of individuals to the truth about a particular individual of that class. It is generally given as a quantification rule for the universal quantifier but it can also be encoded in an axiom schema. It is one of the basic principles used in quantification theory. Example: "All dogs are mammals. Fido is a dog. Therefore Fido is a mammal." Formally, the rule as an axiom schema is given as : \forall x \, A \Rightarrow A\, for every formula ''A'' and every term ''a'', where A\ is the result of substituting ''a'' for each ''free'' occurrence of ''x'' in ''A''. \, A\ is an instance of \forall x \, A. And as a rule of inference it is :from \vdash \forall x A infer \vdash A \ . Irving Copi noted that universal instantiation "...follows from variants of rules ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Modus Ponens
In propositional logic, ''modus ponens'' (; MP), also known as ''modus ponendo ponens'' (Latin Latin (, or , ) is a classical language belonging to the Italic branch of the Indo-European languages. Latin was originally a dialect spoken in the lower Tiber area (then known as Latium) around present-day Rome, but through the power ... for "method of putting by placing") or implication elimination or affirming the antecedent, is a Deductive reasoning, deductive argument form and rule of inference. It can be summarized as "''P material conditional, implies Q.'' ''P'' is true. Therefore ''Q'' must also be true." ''Modus ponens'' is closely related to another Validity (logic), valid form of argument, ''modus tollens''. Both have apparently similar but invalid forms such as affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and evidence of absence. Constructive dilemma is the Logical disjunction, disjunctive version of ''modus ponens''. Hypothetical syllogism is close ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Deduction Theorem
In mathematical logic, a deduction theorem is a metatheorem that justifies doing conditional proofs—to prove an implication ''A'' → ''B'', assume ''A'' as an hypothesis and then proceed to derive ''B''—in systems that do not have an explicit inference rule for this. Deduction theorems exist for both propositional logic and first-order logic. The deduction theorem is an important tool in Hilbert-style deduction systems because it permits one to write more comprehensible and usually much shorter proofs than would be possible without it. In certain other formal proof systems the same conveniency is provided by an explicit inference rule; for example natural deduction calls it implication introduction. In more detail, the propositional logic deduction theorem states that if a formula B is deducible from a set of assumptions \Delta \cup \ then the implication A \to B is deducible from \Delta ; in symbols, \Delta \cup \ \vdash B implies \Delta \vdash A \to B . In the s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
First-order Logic
First-order logic—also known as predicate logic, quantificational logic, and first-order predicate calculus—is a collection of formal systems used in mathematics, philosophy, linguistics, and computer science. First-order logic uses quantified variables over non-logical objects, and allows the use of sentences that contain variables, so that rather than propositions such as "Socrates is a man", one can have expressions in the form "there exists x such that x is Socrates and x is a man", where "there exists''"'' is a quantifier, while ''x'' is a variable. This distinguishes it from propositional logic, which does not use quantifiers or relations; in this sense, propositional logic is the foundation of first-order logic. A theory about a topic is usually a first-order logic together with a specified domain of discourse (over which the quantified variables range), finitely many functions from that domain to itself, finitely many predicates defined on that domain, and a set ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
|
|
Hasty Generalization
A faulty generalization is an informal fallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances of that phenomenon. It is similar to a proof by example in mathematics. It is an example of jumping to conclusions. For example, one may generalize about all people or all members of a group, based on what one knows about just one or a few people: * If one meets a rude person from a given country X, one may suspect that most people in country X are rude. * If one sees only white swans, one may suspect that all swans are white. Expressed in more precise philosophical language, a fallacy of defective induction is a conclusion that has been made on the basis of weak premises, or one which is not justified by sufficient or unbiased evidence. Unlike fallacies of relevance, in fallacies of defective induction, the premises are related to the conclusions, yet only weakly buttress the conclusions, hence a faulty generalization ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |