chapter nine

15
Chapter Nine Predicate Logic Proofs

Upload: jena

Post on 01-Feb-2016

45 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Chapter Nine. Predicate Logic Proofs. 1. Proving Validity. The eighteen valid argument forms plus CP and IP that are the proof machinery of sentential logic are incorporated intact into predicate logic. However, for proofs in predicate logic we must introduce four new rules of implication. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Chapter Nine

Chapter Nine

Predicate Logic Proofs

Page 2: Chapter Nine

1. Proving Validity

The eighteen valid argument forms plus CP and IP that are the proof machinery of sentential logic are incorporated

intact into predicate logic.

However, for proofs in predicate logic we must introduce four new rules of implication.

These rules of implication tell us when taking off quantifiers in justified and when replacing them is justified.

Page 3: Chapter Nine

2. The Four Quantifier Rules

• Universal Instantiation (UI)

• Universal Generalization (UG)

• Existential Instantiation (EI)

• Existential Generalization (EG)

Page 4: Chapter Nine

3. The Five Main Restrictions

• An EI must be done to a quasivariable• A quasivariable introduced into a proof by rule EI must

not have occurred as a quasivariable previously in the proof.

• UG cannot be performed on a constant.• If a variable is free in an EI line, we cannot use UG to

bind that variable.• When we make an assumption with a quasivariable, we

cannot bind that variable with UG so long as we are relying on the assumption in which it occurs.

Page 5: Chapter Nine

4. Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules

Rule UI: (u) (…u…)/Therefore, (…w…)

Provided: 1. (…w…) results from replacing each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is either a constant or a

variable free in (…w…) (making no other changes).

Page 6: Chapter Nine

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued

Rule EI: (∃u) (…u…)/Therefore, (…w…)

Provided: 1. w is not a constant; 2. w does not occur previously in the proof; 3. (…w…) results from replacing

each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (…w…) (making no other changes).

Page 7: Chapter Nine

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued

Rule UG:(…u…)/Therefore, (w) (…w…)

Provided: 1. w is not a constant; 2. u does not occur free previously in a line obtained by EI; 3. u does not occur free previously in an assumed premise that has not yet

been discharged; 4. (…w…) results from replacing each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (…

w…) (making no other changes) and there are no additional free occurrences of w already contained in (…

w…)

Page 8: Chapter Nine

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued

Rule EG:(…u…)/Therefore, (∃w) (…w…)

Provided: 1. (…w…) results from replacing at least one occurrence of u, where u is a constant or a variable free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (...w…) (making no other

changes), and there are no additional free occurrences of w already contained in (…w…).

Page 9: Chapter Nine

5. Mastering the Four Quantifier Rules

• Do not try to do two things at once, such as change bound x’s to free x’s and y’s, bind both an x and a y at once, and so on.

• Do not violate the two restrictions having to do with constants.

• When using EI, check to make sure that the variable we are introducing does not occur free on any earlier line.

• When using UG, check to make sure that the variable we are binding is not free in an EI line or an undischarged assumed premise.

Page 10: Chapter Nine

Mastering the Four Quantifier Rules, continued

• If you must use EI, do so as soon as possible.

Remember: These rules are to be applied to whole lines of proofs only!

Page 11: Chapter Nine

6. Quantifier Negation

The four other inference rules to be introduced into our predicate logic proof procedure are all referred to by the

name Quantifier Negation (QN)

Page 12: Chapter Nine

Quantifier Negation, continued

Adding (x) to an expression does the same job as adding ˜( x) ˜ to that expression, and, similarly, adding ˜( x) ˜ to ∃ ∃

an expression does the same as adding (x) to it.

The first version of rule QN allows us to make inferences from of these sorts of expressions to the other.

Page 13: Chapter Nine

Quantifier Negation, continued

The other three varieties of Rule QN are similar to the first one.

The first tells us that we can move from “Everything has weight,” to “There isn’t anything that does not have

weight,” the second from “Something has weight” to “It’s not the case that nothing has weight,” the third from

“Everything is such that it doesn’t have weight” to “It’s not the case that something has weight,” and the fourth

from “There is something that doesn’t have any weight” to “It’s not the case that everything has weight”.

Page 14: Chapter Nine

Quantifier Negation, continued

The four quantifier negation rules require us to do exactly the same thing:

• Change the quantifier in question from an existential to a universal quantifier, or vice versa

• Remove any negation signs there may have been either to the left or to the right of that quantifier

• Put negation signs in whichever of these two places there may not have originally been one.

Page 15: Chapter Nine

Key Term

• Quasivariable