Scribd
Upload
77 views3 pages

Truth Tables For Arguments

The document discusses constructing truth tables to determine whether arguments are valid or invalid. It explains that an argument is invalid if it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. It provides instructions on setting up truth tables for entire arguments, with premises separated by slashes and conclusions by double slashes. Students are assigned to construct truth tables for several symbolized arguments and determine if they are valid or invalid.

Uploaded by

CARLOS GARCIA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
77 views3 pages

Truth Tables For Arguments

The document discusses constructing truth tables to determine whether arguments are valid or invalid. It explains that an argument is invalid if it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. It provides instructions on setting up truth tables for entire arguments, with premises separated by slashes and conclusions by double slashes. Students are assigned to construct truth tables for several symbolized arguments and determine if they are valid or invalid.

Uploaded by

CARLOS GARCIA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

LESSON #23

Truth Tables for Arguments

Reading Assignment: 6.4 (pp. 334-336)

Click here to bypass the following discussion and go straight to the assignments.

Now we will construct truth tables for entire arguments. Our goal will be to determine whether an
argument is valid or invalid.

Recall that an argument is invalid if it is possible for it to have all true premises at the same time that
it has a false conclusion. (You should be dreaming this definition of invalidity by now (!)) So, we will
construct a truth table that covers every possible truth value arrangement, and then we'll look to see if
there is a row in which all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. If we find such a row, the
argument is invalid; and if there is not such a row, then the argument is valid.

We can also use the truth table to determine whether the premises of an argument are consistent or not.
An argument with inconsistent premises is one in which there is never a row in which all the premises
were true. The point of checking for this is that though an inconsistent argument will always be valid,
(remember that the definition of invalidity is that it is possible for all the premises to be true and the
conclusion to be false--an inconsistent argument will never have all true premises) it can never be
sound. 

Notice that an argument can have consistent statements but be invalid at the same time. Consistency
just means that the premises do not contradict one another. Mere consistency, though, does not
guarantee validity.

Keep in mind that we are dealing with the form of an argument, and not the content. ANY POSSIBLE
content is covered by the columns in the truth table.

Note that a row in which all the premises and the conclusion are true does not guarantee that the
argument is valid. Invalidity and validity are dependent upon the existence or non-existence,
respectively, of a row with all true premises and a false conclusion. That is what we are looking for.

The number of rows will again be determined by the number of different components in the entire
argument.

You should follow Hurley's instructions on pp. 311-312 for constructing the truth tables. These are just
like the truth tables for complex propositions, except that you separate the premises with a single slash
and the conclusion with a double slash.

Model:

A  (B    C) / (B   v D)  C // A  (B   v D)

                                 
This is a 16 line truth table. I didn't draw all the lines because it would take up too much room.

For enthusiastic students only: If you want to be fancy, instead of using slashes you can conjoin the
premises (with dots) and use a horseshoe operator to attach the conclusion, making one big implication
statement. If you are an enthusiastic student, you have already figured out how to read a table done this
way, and why it works.

It is extremely important that you are neat and organized with these truth tables. You should mark in
some way the main connector column of each statement in the argument. These are the columns you
will be using to see if there is a row with all true premises and a false conclusion. You may also want
to cross out the T's and F's you are finished using so you don't end up with a confusing jumble of T's
and F's.

Go slowly and carefully, step-by-step. Review the truth functions of the connectives Don't rush
through this--one mistake can cause the entire table to be wrong. (You may even want to do these
exercises twice to be sure you obtain the same answer both times.) If you are like me your hand might
well be ornery and write a "T" while your brain is thinking "F." In my case this is because of my years
as a deadhead. I don't know about you...(!) In any case check your work.

Logic Coach Assignment: I 1-5, II 5-10

Assignment 1: (15 points each)

Determine whether the following symbolized arguments are valid or invalid by constructing a truth
table for each. Also determine if they are consistent or inconsistent. Indicate the relevant rows for
each determination.

1) A v


2) X  (Y  Z)
    Y   Z
    X Z

3) A · (~C v B) 
    A · C)
    B 

4) P  (Q  ·  ~R)
    Q  Pv ~R)
    ~ (R · Q)

5) A  · ~C) 
    B C v A)
    C 

Assignment 2: (25 points)


Translate the following argument into symbolic form, and then determine validity/invalidity using a
truth table.

If the Andersons are invited to dinner we cannot serve fish, and if the Petersons are invited we cannot
serve fowl. We will either serve fish or fowl. Therefore, either the Andersons or the Petersons will not
be invited.

Home | Table of Contents | Next Assignment | Questions

You might also like