Mathematics in the Modern World – UNIT 2

Reasoning
[Binary Operations]

Department of Mathematics and Physics

University of Santo Tomas

Prepared by: Xandro Alexi A. Nieto

REASONING
When did you become a Thomasian?
a patient’s condition or disease
LOGIC the science of reasoning
•It provides the rules and techniques for
determining whether an argument is valid or not.
•To be specific in Mathematics, we use Logic or
logical reasoning to prove theorems.
 Statement

LOGIC
PROPOSITION
the science of reasoning
Proposition

Examples:

You are a
Thomasian.

LOGIC the science of reasoning

Proposition

Examples:

Smoking is
addictive.
LOGIC the science of reasoning
 Proposition

Examples:
Staying late at
night increases
the risk of brain

LOGIC
cancer. the science of reasoning
Proposition

Examples:
Twice an
integer is
always an even
LOGIC
integer. the science of reasoning
Proposition

Examples:
Twice a number
is always an
even number.
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Proposition

Is this a proposition?

Where do you
live?
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Proposition

Is this a proposition?

Thrice a
number
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Proposition

Is this a proposition?

LISTEN!

LOGIC the science of reasoning

Proposition

Is this a proposition?

IU is
beautiful.
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Proposition

Is this a proposition?

SMART.
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Proposition symbols
IU is
beautiful.

LOGIC p
the science of reasoning
Proposition symbols
IU is not
beautiful.

LOGIC ~p
the science of reasoning
Proposition symbols

SMART.
p
LOGIC the science of reasoning
Negation symbol

~p
LOGIC
NOT SMART.
the science of reasoning
Negation symbol

NOT
LOGIC
Some reference use ¬ to denote negation.
thesame
~ p is the science
asof¬ reasoning
p.
TRUTH TABLE
a tabular
representation of
all the
combinations of
values for inputs
and their
corresponding the science of reasoning
outputs
TRUTH TABLE

p ~p
T F
F T
the science of reasoning
Compound propositions

pq
a proposition
formed by
combining two or

s r
more simple

LOGIC
propositions
the science of reasoning
Compound propositions

Examples:
I am a Thomasian.

LOGIC
p the science of reasoning
Compound propositions

Examples:

q
LOGIC
I enjoy flooded areas.
the science of reasoning
 Compound propositions

Examples:

p LOGIC
q
I am a Thomasian. I enjoy flooded area

the science of reasoning

 Connectives

Examples:
and
p LOGIC
^ q
I am a Thomasian I enjoy flooded area.

the science of reasoning

 Connectives

Examples:
or
p LOGIC
v q
I am a Thomasian I enjoy flooded area.

the science of reasoning

 Connectives

Examples:
If thenI enjoy flooded area.
p LOGIC
q
I am a Thomasian

→
the science of reasoning
Conjunction (AND)

Let p and q be propositions.

The conjunction p and q,
LOGIC
denoted by p ∧ q is the
proposition.
p ∧ q is true if and only if both
p and q are true. Otherwise,
the science of reasoning

false.
Conjunction
p ∧ q is true if and only if both p and q are true. Otherwise,
false.

p q p∧q
T LOGIC
T T
T F F
F T F
the science of reasoning
F F F
Conjunction
Construct the truth table for ~p ∧ q

p q ~p ~ p ∧ q
T LOGIC
T F F
T F F F
F T T T
the science of reasoning
F F T F
Conjunction
Construct the truth table for ~p ∧ ~q

p q ~p ~q ~p ∧ ~q
T
T
T
F
F
F
LOGIC F
T
F
F
F T T F F
the science of reasoning
F F T T T
Conjunction
Construct the truth table for ~(p ∧ q)

p q p ∧ q ~(p∧q)
T TLOGIC T F
T F F T
F T F T
the science of reasoning
F F F T
Disjunction (OR)
Let p and q be propositions.
The disjunction p or q,
LOGIC
denoted by p v q is the
proposition.
p v q is true when one of the
proposition or the
both is oftrue.
science reasoning

Otherwise, false.
Disjunction (OR)
p v q is false if and only if both of p and q is false.
Otherwise, true.

p q pvq
T LOGIC
T T
T F T
F T T
the science of reasoning
F F F
Disjunction
Construct the truth table for p v ~q

p q ~q p v ~q
T LOGIC
T F T
T F T T
F T F F
the science of reasoning
F F T T
Disjunction
Construct the truth table for ~p v ~q

p q ~p ~q ~pv~q
T
T
T
F
LOGIC F
F
F
T
F
T
F T T F T
the science of reasoning T
F F T T
Disjunction
Construct the truth table for ~(p v q)

p q p v q ~(p v q)
T
T
T
F
LOGIC T
T
F
F
F T T F
the science of reasoning
F F F T
~p ∧ ~q is exactly
the the same
science as ~(p v q)
of reasoning
~(p ∧ q) is exactly the same
the science as ~p v ~q
of reasoning
De Morgan’s Law
De Morgan’s Law
~p ∧ ~q ≡ ~(p v q)
~p v ~q ≡ ~(p ∧ q)
Exclusive disjunction (Exactly OR)
p ⊕ q is true when exactly one of p and q is true.
Otherwise, false.

p q p⊕q
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F
Exclusive Disjunction
Construct the truth table for ~p ⊕ q

p q ~p ~p ⊕ q
T
T
T
F
LOGIC F
F
T
F
F T T F
the science of reasoning
F F T T
 NAND (not and)
p NAND q or p|q is false when both p and q are true.
Otherwise, true.

p q p|q
T LOGIC
T F
T F T
F T T
the science of reasoning
F F T
NAND (not and)
Construct the truth table for p|~q

p q ~q p|~q
T LOGIC
T F T
T F T F
F T F T
the science of reasoning
F F T T
 NOR (not or)
p NOR q or p↓q is true when both p and q are false.
Otherwise, false.

p q p↓q
T LOGIC
T F
T F F
F T F
the science of reasoning
F F T
NOR (not or)
Construct the truth table for p↓~q

p q ~q p↓~q
T LOGIC
T F F
T F T F
F T F T
the science of reasoning
F F T F
TRY THIS!
Construct the truth table for ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r
p q ~q (p ⊕ ~q) ~(p ⊕ ~q) r ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r

T T F T F T T
T F T F T T T
F T F F T T T
F F T T F T T
T T F T F F F
T F T F T F T
F T F F the science
T of reasoning
F T
F F T T F F F
TRY THIS!
Construct the truth table for ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r
p q ~q
~q (p ⊕ ~q) ~(p ⊕ ~q) r ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r

T T F T F T T
T F T F T T T
F T F F T T T
F F T T F T T
T T F T F F F
T F T F T F T
F T F F the science
T of reasoning
F T
F F T T F F F
TRY THIS!
Construct the truth table for ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r
p q ~q ⊕⊕
(p(p ~q)
~q) ~(p ⊕ ~q) r ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r

T T F T F T T
T F T F T T T
F T F F T T T
F F T T F T T
T T F T F F F
T F T F T F T
F T F F the science
T of reasoning
F T
F F T T F F F
TRY THIS!
Construct the truth table for ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r
p q ~q (p ⊕ ~q) ~(p ⊕
~(p ⊕ ~q)
~q) r ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r

T T F T F T T
T F T F T T T
F T F F T T T
F F T T F T T
T T F T F F F
T F T F T F T
F T F F the science
T of reasoning
F T
F F T T F F F
TRY THIS!
Construct the truth table for ~(p ⊕ ~q) ∧ r
p q ~q (p ⊕ ~q) ~(p ⊕ ~q) r ⊕ ~q)
~(p ⊕
~(p ∧ rr
~q) ∧

T T F T F T F
T F T F T T T
F T F F T T T
F F T T F T F
T T F T F F F
T F T F T F F
F T F F the science
T of reasoning
F F
F F T T F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r (p v q) ∧ r p∧r q∧r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F the science
F ofF reasoning F
F F F F F F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r (p v q) ∧ r p∧r q∧r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F the science
F ofF reasoning F
F F F F F F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r q)q)∧ ∧
(p(pv v rr p∧r q∧r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F F
the science ofF reasoning F
F F F F F F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r (p v q) ∧ r pp ∧∧ rr q∧r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F the science
F ofF reasoning F
F F F F F F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r (p v q) ∧ r p∧r qq∧∧r r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F the science
F F reasoning F
of
F F F F F F F F
TRY THIS!
Is (p v q) ∧ r ≡ (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)?
p q pvq r (p v q) ∧ r p∧r q∧r (p ∧ r) v (q ∧ r)

T T T T T T T T
T F T T T T F T
F T T T T F T T
F F F T F F F F
T T T F F F F F
T F T F F F F F
F T T F F the science
F ofF reasoning F
F F F F F F F F
 LOGIC
CONDITIONAL
STATEMENTS

the science of reasoning

 In the example,
If thenI enjoy flooded area.
p LOGIC
q
I am a Thomasian

→
the science of reasoning
Conditional Statement
p→q
p is called the hypothesis,
LOGIC
the premise or the antecedent.

q is called the conclusion or

consequence. the science of reasoning
Conditional Statement

If I understand the lesson 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛

I can pass the exam.

LOGIC
p→q

p: I understand the lesson.

q: I can passthethe exam.
science of reasoning
Conditional Statement
p→q

LOGIC
If p 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 q.
p is sufficient for q.
q if p.
q is necessary for
the science p.
of reasoning
p implies q.
Conditional Statement
p→q

LOGIC
If p 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 q.
q when p.
q follows from p.
the science of reasoning
Conditional Statement
p → q is true on the condition the p holds.

p q p→q
T LOGIC
T T
T F F
F T T
the science of reasoning
F F T
 Conditional Statment
If I am a pharmacists 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 I know
drugs/medicine.
p→q p q p→q
T T T
p: I am Pharmacists.
the science of reasoning

q: I know drugs/medicine.
T F F
F T T
F F T
 Conditional Statement
If I understand the lesson 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 I can pass the
exam.

p→q p q p→q
T T T
p: I understand the lesson.
T F F
q: I can pass the exam.
F
the science of reasoning T T
F F T
Conditional Statement
Construct a truth table for ~p→~q

p q ~p ~q ~p→~q
T T F F T
T F F T T
F T T F F
the science of reasoning
F F T T T
Conditional Statement
Note that:

q → p is the converse of p → q.
~q → ~p is the contrapositive of p → q.
~p → ~q is the inverse of p → q.
the science of reasoning
Bi-conditional Statement
p ↔ q is true when both (p and q) statements are the same.

p q p↔q
T T T The “if and only if”
T F F statement.
F T F
the science of reasoning
F F T
Bi-conditional Statement
Construct a truth table for p ↔ ~q.

p q ~q p↔~q
T T F F
T F T T
F T F T
the science of reasoning
F F T F
Exercise:

Construct a truth table for (p ∧ q) → (p → q)

Exercise:
Construct a truth table for (p ∧ q) → (p → q)
p q p∧q p→q (p ∧ q) → (p → q)
T T T T T
T F F F T
F T F T T
F F F T
Tthe science of reasoning
Types of compound propositions
If a compound proposition is always true, it is called
a tautology.

If a compound proposition is always false, it is called

a contradiction or absurdity.

A compound proposition is called a contingency if it

is not a tautology nor a contradiction.
the science of reasoning
An argument is said to be valid if it is a tautology.

the science of reasoning

Types of compound propositions

the science of reasoning

Is this a valid argument?
If you smoke, then you will have lung cancer.
You have lung cancer.
Therefore, you smoke.

the science of reasoning

If you smoke, then you will have lung cancer.
You have lung cancer.
Therefore, you smoke.

p: You smoke.
q: You have lung cancer.
the science of reasoning
If you smoke, then you will have lung cancer.
p→q
You have lung cancer.

q
Therefore, you smoke.
the science of reasoning
∴p
p→q q p

the science of reasoning

(p→q ∧ q )→ p

the science of reasoning

[(p → q) ∧ q ] → p

the science of reasoning

Construct a truth table for [(p → q) ∧ q ] → p
p q p → q [(p → q) ∧ q [(p → q) ∧ q ] → p
T T T T T
T F F F T
F T T T F
F F T F T
the science of reasoning
Is this a valid argument?
If you smoke, then you will have lung cancer.
You have lung cancer.
Therefore, you smoke.

the science of reasoning

Is this a valid argument?
If it rains nonstop, then UST will be flooded.
If is UST is flooded, then there will be
no classes.
It rains nonstop, then there will be no
classes
p: It rains nonstop.
q: UST will be flooded.
r: There are no classes.
If it rains nonstop, then UST will be flooded.
p→q
If is UST is flooded, then there will be no classes.
q→r
It rains nonstop, then there will be no classes
p→r
Construct a Truth table for:

[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Truth table
[(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
p q p→q r q→r [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)] p→r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)

T T T T T T T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
T T T F F F F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T F F F
the science ofTreasoning T
F F T F T T T T
Is this a valid argument?
If it rains nonstop, then UST will be flooded.
If is UST is flooded, then there will be
no classes.
It rains nonstop, then there will be no
classes
Mathematics in the Modern World – UNIT 2

END OF UNIT 2