Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Then the converse of S is the statement Q implies P (Q → P). In general, the truth of S says nothing about the truth of its converse, [2] unless the antecedent P and the consequent Q are logically equivalent. For example, consider the true statement "If I am a human, then I am mortal."
In propositional logic, affirming the consequent (also known as converse error, fallacy of the converse, or confusion of necessity and sufficiency) is a formal fallacy (or an invalid form of argument) that is committed when, in the context of an indicative conditional statement, it is stated that because the consequent is true, therefore the ...
The previous example employed the contrapositive of a definition to prove a theorem. One can also prove a theorem by proving the contrapositive of the theorem's statement. To prove that if a positive integer N is a non-square number , its square root is irrational , we can equivalently prove its contrapositive, that if a positive integer N has ...
What is the scope and the range of "converse"? Another example is "contrapositive", or "contraposition". As a process within logic it is limited to traditional logic and requires a reasoning process involving obversion, conversion, and obversion again. But in truth functional logic this type of inference is replaced with the rule of transposition.
An immediate inference is an inference which can be made from only one statement or proposition. [1] For instance, from the statement "All toads are green", the immediate inference can be made that "no toads are not green" or "no toads are non-green" (Obverse).
In the monoid of binary endorelations on a set (with the binary operation on relations being the composition of relations), the converse relation does not satisfy the definition of an inverse from group theory, that is, if is an arbitrary relation on , then does not equal the identity relation on in general.
The inverse and the converse of a conditional are logically equivalent to each other, just as the conditional and its contrapositive are logically equivalent to each other. [1] But the inverse of a conditional cannot be inferred from the conditional itself (e.g., the conditional might be true while its inverse might be false [2]). For example ...
Converse (logic), the result of reversing the two parts of a definite or implicational statement Converse implication, the converse of a material implication; Converse nonimplication, a logical connective which is the negation of the converse implication; Converse (semantics), pairs of words that refer to a relationship from opposite points of view