University of the Codilleras

Introduction to Logic
Atty. Nestor Mondoc

Feb 21, 2015

Symbolic Logic

Nagulman, Harmony T.

Symbolic Logic

Two bodies of logical theory:

1. Classical or Traditional logic (chapter 5 through 7)
Fundamental elements were terms.
Traditional logic is the system of logic originally formulated by
Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, in the fourth century BC. Traditional logic
involves mostly the study of the classical syllogism.
Traditional logic has also been called term logic, since it deals
primarily (but not exclusively) with the relation of terms in an argument (in
this case, the terms man, mortal, and Socrates). Whether the reasoning is
valid depends on the proper arrangement of these terms in an argument. 1
Here is a classic example of a simple syllogism, which we will use
shortly as a way to see how the two systems of traditional and modern logic
are different:
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore, Socrates is mortal2
Traditional logic has also been called term logic, since it deals
primarily (but not exclusively) with the relation of terms in an argument (in
this case, the terms man, mortal, and Socrates). Whether the reasoning is
valid depends on the proper arrangement of these terms in an argument.
2. Modern logic
Although traditional categorical logic can be used to represent and
assess many of our most common patterns of reasoning, modern logicians
have developed much more comprehensive and powerful systems for
expressing rational thought. These newer logical languages are often called
"symbolic logic," since they employ special symbols to represent clearly even
highly complex logical relationships.3
There are five connectives: negation, conjunction, disjunction,
conditional, and biconditional. In the notation of symbolic logic, these
connectives are represented by operators.
Modern logic begins by first identifying the fundamental logical
connectives on which the deductive argument depends.
1 http://vereloqui.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-difference-between-traditional-and.html

2 14th Edition of Introduction to Logic by Copi, Cohen & McMahon

3 http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e10a.htm

With symbols we can perform some logical operations almost

mechanically, with eye, which might otherwise demand great effort. It may
seem paradoxical, but a symbolic language therefore helps us to accomplish
some intellectual tasks without having to think too much.
The system of modern logic is in some ways less elegant than
analytical syllogistic, but it is more powerful. Using the approach taken by
modern logic with its more versatile symbolic language, we can pursue the
aims of deductive analysis directly and permit more efficient achievement of
the central aim of deductive logic: discriminating between valid and invalid
argument.4
Statement
To understand the symbolic representation used in propositional logic, we
must distinguish Simple statements from Compound statements.

Simple statement
E.g.

Does not contain another statement as a component.

Contains a subject and a predicate.
It can also contain dependent clauses, but the basic idea is
that the smallest grammatical unit has a truth value.
Charlie is neat
S
P
Fast foods tend to be unhealthy.
S
P
James Joyce wrote Ulysses.5
S
P

Compound statement
Contains at least one simple statement as a component along with
a connective. Of course, the components of a compound statement may
themselves be compound.
E.g. Charlie is neat and Charlie is sweet.
1
2
Neither Fast food nor canned goods is healthy.
1
2
Compound statements can be formed by inserting the word NOT, or
joining two or more statements with connective words such as AND, OR, IF
THEN, ONLY IF, IF AND ONLY IF. (Will be discussed on the later part)
4 Copi, Cohen chap 8
5 Patrick Hurley

Logical operators:
a. Negation (~)
Truth function:
The ~ signifies logical negation; it simply reverses the truth value of
any statement (simple or compound) in front of which it appears: if the
original is true, the ~ statement is false, and if the original is false, the ~
statement is true. Thus, its meaning can be
represented by the truth-table below.6
p
~p

The

English expression "It is not the case that . . ."

serves the same function, though of course we have
many other methods of negating an assertion in ordinary language
sometimes the single word "not" embedded in a sentence is enough to do
the job.
The tilde ~ symbol is used to translate any negated simple or compound
statements.
Rolex does not make computers

~R

It is not the case that Rolex make computers

~R

It is false that Rolex makes computers

~R

Jamal and Derek will not both be elected

~ (J D)
Jamal and Derek will both not be elected
~ (J)

.~ (D)

~(R

. H)

~(R) ~ (H)

De Morgan's Laws
The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and disjunctions purely in
terms of each other via negation
~[

~(R v H) v A]

(R v H) v ~ A

De Morgan's Laws:
6 http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e10a.htm

They are named after Augustus De Morgan, a 19th-century British

mathematician. The rules allow the expression of conjunctions and
disjunctions purely in terms of each other via negation.

As these example shows, the tilde is always placed in front or before

the proposition it negate. All of the other operators are placed between two
propositions. Also unlike other propositions, the tilde cannot be used to
connect two propositions.7

Argument Forms and refutation

by Logical Analogy

This method of refutation by logical analogy points the way to an

excellent general technique for testing arguments. To prove the invalidity of
an argument, it suffices to formulate another argument that:
(1) Has exactly the same form as the first and;
(2) Has true premises and false conclusions.
This method is based on the fact that validity and invalidity are purely
formal characteristics of arguments, which is to say that any two arguments
that have exactly the same form are either both valid or both invalid,
regardless of any differences in the subject matter with which they are
concerned8
This informal account of validity must now be made more precise. To do this,
we introduce the concept of an argument form. Consider the following two
arguments:
If bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare,
then Bacon was a great writer
Bacon was a great writer
Therefore, Bacon wrote the plays
attributed to Shakespeare.

If P then Q
Then
Q
P

This method of refutation by logical analogy, points away to an excellent

general technique for testing arguments. To prove the invalidity of the
argument, it suffices to formulate another argument that:
(1) Has exactly the same form as the first.
(2) Has true premises and a false conclusion.
This method is based upon the fact that validity and invalidity are purely
formal characteristics of arguments, which is to say that any two arguments
having exactly the same form are either both valid or both invalid,
regardless of any differences in the subject matter with which they are
concerned.
7 Patrick Hurley and Copi, Cohen chap 8
8 Copi, Cohen chap 8