symbolization

2013

Tutorial 22 Symbolizing Relations.

The Tutorial

Thus far we have considered only 'monadic' predicates-- our atomic formulas consist of a predicate followed by only one term-- for example, Fx. But in English we regularly encounter dyadic predicates or relations. For example, 'Arthur is taller than Bert' cannot be symbolized with the tools we have used so far; what is needed is a relation to represent '...is taller than ...' Txy, say, and then the proposition would be symbolized Tab.

 

---

 

Tutorial 16 Symbolization using the quantifiers.

2013

Skill to be acquired in this tutorial:

To learn how to use the Universal and Existential Quantifiers in symbolizing propositions.

Reading

Bergmann[2008] The Logic Book Sections 7.4

2013

A start can be made in predicate logic by taking apart 'atomic' sentences and by re-phrasing what they have to say in a 'entity-has-property' way.

The constant terms a,b,c...h are used to denote entities, the predicates A,B,C...Z are used to denote properties that these entities have, and these are put together by writing the predicate first followed by the term, for example Gb.

2013

In predicate logic, many different styles of expression in English get cast into the same 'property-is-had-by-entity' form. For example,

2013

Skills to be acquired in this tutorial:

To start learning how to symbolize sentences using predicate logic.

The Tutorial:

There are many valid arguments which cannot be shown to be valid using sentential logic alone. For example,

 

Beryl is a philosopher.
All philosophers are wise.
Therefore
Beryl is wise.

There are many valid arguments which cannot be shown to be valid using sentential logic alone. For example,

Beryl is a philosopher.
All philosophers are wise.
Therefore
Beryl is wise.

1/24/06

eg Lander or Suber

The problem or issue here lies with the truth table for the conditional (or material implication) ⊃

There is the idea of setting up a code or convention or dictionary between atomic propositions and capital letters.

There are compound propositions, each of which has a main connective which connects its components.

There are five propositional logical connectives:

'∼' which translates back to 'it is not the case that...'

'&' which translates back to '... and ...'

'∨' which translates back to '... or ...'

'⊃' which translates back to 'if... then ...'

'≡' which translates back to '... if and only if ...'