Systems Of Reasoning (S1E03) : Semantics, consistency and soundness.
I am going to make this blogpost a bit different. I am going to make it a bit “fun”, and less proof/theorem.
Any propositional variables can be assigned a truth (\(T\)) or falsehood (\(F\)) value through a mapping \(f : \Phi \rightarrow \{T,F\}\). Where \(\Phi\) is a set of all propositional variables. We can show that it’s more general than this, i.e. \(\Phi\) can be a set that contains all eff
—– HOW?—-
The values can be retrieved through \(f_x\), where we have
- \(f_{x}p = f(p)\) for some propositional variable \(p\)
- \(f_{x} \sim B = \sim f_{x} \sim B\) for some wff \(B\).
- \(f_{x} [B \vee C] = f_{x} B \vee f_{x} C\) for some wffs \(B, C\).
Facts
- For some wff \(A\), we write \(\vDash A\) and say that \(A\) is a tautology if \(f_{x} A = T\) for any assignment (\(x\)) I make to the internal statements. That is to say that \(A\) evaluates to true probably because of its structure and not its content.
- If a wff \(A\) always evaluates to F, then we say \(A\) is a contradiction.
- \(A\) implies \(B\) iff \(\vDash A \Rightarrow B\)
- \(A\) is equivalent to \(B\) iff \(A \equiv B\) is a tautology.