Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A premise or premiss [a] is a proposition—a true or false declarative statement—used in an argument to prove the truth of another proposition called the conclusion. [1] Arguments consist of a set of premises and a conclusion. An argument is meaningful for its conclusion only when all of its premises are true. If one or more premises are ...
a set of operator symbols, called connectives, [18] [1] [50] logical connectives, [1] logical operators, [1] truth-functional connectives, [1] truth-functors, [37] or propositional connectives. [ 2 ] A well-formed formula is any atomic formula, or any formula that can be built up from atomic formulas by means of operator symbols according to ...
For valid arguments, the logical structure of the premises and the conclusion follows a pattern called a rule of inference. [12] For example, modus ponens is a rule of inference according to which all arguments of the form "(1) p , (2) if p then q , (3) therefore q " are valid, independent of what the terms p and q stand for. [ 13 ]
The statement formed by reversing the antecedent and consequent of a conditional statement, not necessarily maintaining logical equivalence. converse domain In set theory and logic, the set of all elements that are related to any element of a given set under a specific relation. [72] converse barcan formula
An argument, more fully a premise–conclusion argument, is a two-part system composed of premises and conclusion. An argument is valid if and only if its conclusion is a consequence of its premises. Every premise set has infinitely many consequences each giving rise to a valid argument.
A proposition can be modeled equivalently with the inverse image of under the indicator function, which is sometimes called the characteristic set of the proposition. For instance, if w {\displaystyle w} and w ′ {\displaystyle w'} are the only worlds in which the sky is blue, the proposition that the sky is blue could be modeled as the set ...
A statement can be called valid, i.e. logical truth, in some systems of logic like in Modal logic if the statement is true in all interpretations. In Aristotelian logic statements are not valid per se. Validity refers to entire arguments. The same is true in propositional logic (statements can be true or false but not called valid or invalid).
According to Douglas N. Walton and colleagues, an argument map has two basic components: "One component is a set of circled numbers arrayed as points. Each number represents a proposition (premise or conclusion) in the argument being diagrammed. The other component is a set of lines or arrows joining the points.