LOGIC NOTES
1. What is Logic? What is Logical Reasoning?
• Logic is the systematic study of the principles of valid inference and correct reasoning. It
helps us determine when a statement follows necessarily from a set of premises. It is a tool
to solve problems.
• Logical Reasoning is the ability to analyse arguments, identify the relationships between
propositions, and determine the validity of conclusions. It is the process of problem solving
using logic as the tool.
Like atoms are the building blocks of matter, propositions are the fundamental units of logic.
2. What is a Proposition?
• A proposition is a declarative statement that is either true or false, but not both.
Parts of a Proposition:
1. Subject: The part about which something is being said.
2. Predicate: The part which says something about the subject.
Example:
“All dogs are mammals.”
Subject: Dogs
Predicate: are mammals
Difference Between Propositions and Ordinary Statements
In logic, a proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false, but not both. However,
in everyday language, we use many kinds of sentences that do not qualify as propositions because
they do not express a truth-value.
Types of Non-Propositional (Ordinary) Statements
Is it a
Type Description Example Proposition
?
Interrogative Ask a question – do not declare anything "Is it raining
No
Sentences to be true or false. outside?"
Exclamatory "What a beautiful
Express strong feelings or emotions. No
Sentences sunset!"
Imperative Sentences Issue a command or request. "Close the door." No
Opinions (without Express a personal preference or feeling "Chocolate is the
(subjective)
claim to truth) without objective truth. best avor."
Examples of Propositions
• "The Earth revolves around the Sun." → True proposition
• "Water boils at 90°C at sea level." → False proposition
• "It is raining in Delhi at this time." → Proposition (Truth depends on actual weather)
3. What is an Argument?
An argument is a group of propositions in which some (premises) are intended to support another
(the conclusion).
Argument Structure:
• Premises: Statements that provide support or evidence.
• Conclusion: The statement that follows from the premises.
Indicators:
• Premise indicators: because, since, for, as, given that
• Conclusion indicators: therefore, thus, hence, so, it follows that
Example Argument:
All humans are mortal.
Socrates is a human.
∴ Socrates is mortal.
Structure:
• Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
• Premise 2: Socrates is a human.
• Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
Types of Reasoning or Inference : Deductive vs Inductive
Aspect Deductive Reasoning Inductive Reasoning
fl
Directio General → Speci c Speci c → General
n
Nature Certain conclusion Probable conclusion
Evaluat
Valid / Invalid / sound Strong / Weak / cogent
ion
All men are mortal.
Exampl All swans observed till now are white.
Socrates is a man.
e ∴ All swans are white.
∴ Socrates is mortal.
4. Truth and Validity
• Truth is a property of individual propositions or premises.
• Validity is a property of arguments (whether the conclusion logically follows from the
premises).
For Deductive Arguments:
• Valid: If conclusion necessarily follows.
• Sound: If valid and all premises are true.
For Inductive Arguments:
• Strong: If conclusion probably follows.
• Cogent: If strong and all premises are true.
1. Valid but Not Sound (Deductive Argument)
All sh can y.
Gold sh are sh.
∴ Gold sh can y.
• Validity: Valid (the conclusion logically follows the premises)
• Soundness: Not sound (the rst premise is false)
2. Sound Argument (Deductive Argument)
All mammals are warm-blooded.
A dog is a mammal.
∴ A dog is warm-blooded.
• Validity: Valid
• Soundness: Sound (both premises are true and the reasoning is valid)
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
fi
fi
3. Strong (Inductive Argument)
90% of humans are right-handed.
Sarah is a human.
∴ Sarah is right-handed.
• Strength: Strong (high probability)
4. Weak (Inductive Argument)
10% of students who study pass the exam.
Raj studied for the exam.
∴ Raj will pass the exam.
• Strength: Weak (low probability)
5. Cogent Argument (Inductive Argument)
Most dogs bark when strangers enter their home.
Max is a dog.
∴ Max will probably bark when a stranger enters.
• Strength: Strong
• Cogency: Cogent (premises are true and strongly support the conclusion)
5. Compound Propositions & Truth Tables
Basic Logical Operators:
Symbo
Operator Meaning Example
l
P∧Q
Conjunction ∧ or . And
P.Q
Or
Disjunction ∨ P∨Q
(inclusive)
Negation ¬ Not ¬P
Conditional → If...then P→Q
Biconditiona
↔ If and only if P ↔ Q
l
Negation (¬P)
Negation simply reverses the truth value.
P ¬P
T F
F T
2. Conjunction (P ∧ Q)
True only if both P and Q are true.
PQ P∧Q
TT T
TF F
FT F
FF F
3. Disjunction (P ∨ Q)
True if at least one of P or Q is true.
PQ P∨Q
TT T
TF T
FT T
FF F
4. Conditional (P → Q)
False only if P is true and Q is false.
PQ P→Q
TT T
TF F
FT T
FF T
5. Biconditional (P ↔ Q)
True if both P and Q have the same truth value.
PQ P↔Q
TT T
TF F
FT F
FF T
6. Truth Table Methods for Validity
Direct Truth Table Method (for small number of propositions):
• List all possible truth values of premises and conclusion.
• Check if any row has all true premises and false conclusion.
◦ If such a row exists → Invalid
◦ If no such row exists → Valid
Indirect (Short) Truth Table Method:
• Assume premises true and conclusion false.
• Try to derive a consistent truth value assignment.
◦ If contradiction arises → Valid
◦ If consistent → Invalid
Valid Argument Example
Argument:
1. P→Q
2. Q→R
∴P→R
Direct Truth Table Method
We construct the truth table:
Premises Conclusio
P Q R P→Q Q→R P→R
(1 ∧ 2) n
TTT T T T T T
TTF T F F F F
TF T F T T F T
TF F F T F F F
FTT T T T T T
FTF T F T F T
FF T T T T T T
FF F T T T T T
In all rows where the premises are true (rows 1, 5, 7, 8), the conclusion is also true.
Therefore, the argument is valid.
Indirect Truth Table Method
Assume:
• Premises are true
• Conclusion is false
That means:
• P→Q=T
• Q→R=T
• P → R = F (so P = T and R = F)
Let’s try to assign values to make this happen:
• From P → R = F → P = T, R = F
• From P → Q = T and P = T → Q must be T
• From Q → R = T and Q = T, R = F → This makes Q → R = F (contradiction)
No Contradiction Cannot make premises true and conclusion false Valid argument.
Invalid Argument Example
Argument:
1. P→Q
2. Q
∴P
Direct Truth Table Method
P Q P→Q Premise 1 Premise 2 Conclusion
TT T T T T
TF F F F T
FT T T T F
FF T T F F
In row 3, both premises are true, but conclusion is false.
Therefore, the argument is invalid.
Indirect Truth Table Method
Assume:
• Premises are true
• Conclusion is false P=F
From:
• P → Q = T, and P = F always true
• Q = T (from 2nd premise) So possible values:
• P=F
• Q=T
• P→Q=T
• Q=T
• Conclusion: P = F False Matches
This assignment is possible → The premises can be true, and conclusion false.
So the argument is invalid.