Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Contraposition. In logic and mathematics, contraposition, or transposition, refers to the inference of going from a conditional statement into its logically equivalent contrapositive, and an associated proof method known as § Proof by contrapositive. The contrapositive of a statement has its antecedent and consequent inverted and flipped.
More broadly, proof by contradiction is any form of argument that establishes a statement by arriving at a contradiction, even when the initial assumption is not the negation of the statement to be proved. In this general sense, proof by contradiction is also known as indirect proof, proof by assuming the opposite, [2] and reductio ad impossibile.
One valid argument form is known as modus ponens, not to be mistaken with modus tollens, which is another valid argument form that has a like-sounding name and structure. Modus ponens (sometimes abbreviated as MP) says that if one thing is true, then another will be. It then states that the first is true. The conclusion is that the second thing ...
This diagram shows the contradictory relationships between categorical propositions in the square of opposition of Aristotelian logic. In traditional logic, a contradiction occurs when a proposition conflicts either with itself or established fact. It is often used as a tool to detect disingenuous beliefs and bias.
Proof by contraposition infers the statement "if p then q" by establishing the logically equivalent contrapositive statement: "if not q then not p". For example, contraposition can be used to establish that, given an integer x {\displaystyle x} , if x 2 {\displaystyle x^{2}} is even, then x {\displaystyle x} is even:
Affirming the consequent is the action of taking a true statement and invalidly concluding its converse . The name affirming the consequent derives from using the consequent, Q, of , to conclude the antecedent P. This fallacy can be summarized formally as or, alternatively, . [5]
Modus tollens is a mixed hypothetical syllogism that takes the form of "If P, then Q. Not Q. Therefore, not P." It is an application of the general truth that if a statement is true, then so is its contrapositive. The form shows that inference from P implies Q to the negation of Q implies the negation of P is a valid argument.
Universal generalization / instantiation. Existential generalization / instantiation. In propositional logic, material implication[1][2] is a valid rule of replacement that allows a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not- or and ...