Truth Table for implication:

pqp —> q
TTT
TFF
FTT
FFT

If the consequence happens, but the premise doesn’t, the implication truth value is still true!

Demonstration:

p: if you get 100%
q: I will give you an A
if p is true and q is false, p->q is false
if p is false and q is true, p->q is still true(he was feeling generous so you still got an A or whatever)

Converse, Contrapositive, and Inverse

It raining is a sufficient condition for my not going to town.

Converse: If I’m not going to town, then it’s raining. (swap the conditions order)

Inverse: If it’s not raining, then I will go to town (negate both of the conditions)

Contrapositive: If I go to town, then it’s not raining (swap the conditions order and negate both of them)

Biconditionals: p ⇔ q

Truth Table for Biconditionals:

pqp⇔ q
TTT
FTF
TFF
FFT

What makes it different than &&?

Both of them being False actually returns True.

Constructing a truth table

Calculating rows: 2 (cuz either True or False) to the power of propositions.

Ex: p V q -> r

2 to the power of 3 = 8
first column: 8/2 = 4 T/F
second column = 4/2 = 2 T/F
third column = 2/2 = 1 T/F

What does this mean?

**This decides the truth table insertion in a systematic manner (crazy!)

Demonstration:**

pqr
TTT
TTF
TFT
TFF
FTT
FTF
FFT
FFF

Notice the pattern in each column

pqr¬rpVqpVq -> ¬ r
TTTFTF
TTFTTT
TFTFTF
TFFTTT
FTTFTF
FTFTTT
FFTFFT
FFFTFT

Precedence of Logical Operators

¬ > > > >

Practice

*“You can access the Internet from campus only if you are a CS major or you are not a freshman.”

Internet from campus = p
CS major = q
freshman = r

p ⇒ (q∨¬r)

Proposition Types

Tautology propositions: always true

Ex: p ∨ ¬p

Contradiction proposition: always false

Ex: p ∧ ¬p

Contingency proposition: neither of the above

p and q are logically equivalent: if p ⇔ q is a tautology