TRUTH TABLES: EVALUATING ARGUMENTS FOR VALIDITY AND INVALIDITY The gut idea A truth table for an argument

reveals every possible assignment of truth values to the premises and the conclusion. With every possible assignment of truth values before us, we can see whether it is possible for all the premises to be true and the conclusion false. If it is, the argument is invalid; if it is not, the argument is valid. Some guidelines for doing truth tables for arguments 1. Assign truth values mechanically. a. Place the capital letters of atomic statements in sequence from left to right in the order that they appear in our symbolization. b. The number of rows for atomic statements that you need is 2n, where n is the number of atomic statements. c. Start assigning truth values to atomic statements in columns by first assigning truth values to the far right statement: alternate Ts and Fs in the column beneath it. The next column to the left: alternate pairs of Ts and Fs. The next column to the left: alternate quadruples of Ts and Fs. The next column to the left: alternate groups of eight. The next column to the left: alternative groups of sixteen, and so on (doubling). 2. Identify the main logical operator of each premise and the conclusion. 3. In the case of complex compound statements, work out the truth values of simpler compounds first, then work your way outward to the main logical operator. 4. Look for a row where all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. Assuming youve done everything correctly up to this point, if there is one, the argument is invalid, and if there isnt, the argument is valid. Some examples: the five famous valid forms and two famous invalid forms Modus ponens If God exists, then there is no gratuitous evil. God exists. So, there is no gratuitous evil. (G: God exists; E: There is gratuitous evil) Modus tollens If God exists, then there is no gratuitous evil. It is false that there is no gratuitous evil. So, God does not exist. (G: God exists; E: There is gratuitous evil) Denying the antecedent If fetuses are persons, then abortion is not morally permissible. Fetuses are not persons. So, it is false that abortion is not morally permissible. (F: Fetuses are persons; A: Abortion is morally permissible) Affirming the consequent If fetuses are persons, then abortion is not morally permissible. Abortion is not morally permissible. So, fetuses are persons. (F: Fetuses are persons; A: Abortion is morally permissible)

Disjunctive syllogism Either its raining or its sunny. Its not sunny. So, its raining. (R: Its raining; S: Its sunny) Hypothetical syllogism If God exists, then there is no gratuitous evil. If there is no gratuitous evil, then the American slave trade was not a gratuitous evil. So, if God exists, then the American slave trade was not a gratuitous evil. (G: God exists; E: There is gratuitous evil; H: The American slave trade was a gratuitous evil) Constructive dilemma Either its raining or its sunny. If its raining, then its cloudy outside. If its sunny, then it is bright outside. So, either its cloudy outside or its bright outside. (R: Its raining; S: Its sunny; C: Its cloudy outside; B: Its bright outside) Demonstrate how to do it online