Unformatted text preview: Negating an Implication
Negating
We have seen that
~(pVq) is logically equivalent to ~pΛ~q .
And we have seen that
~(p Λq) is logically equivalent to ~p V ~q .
Question: How do you negate p => q? You might think that the negation of an
implication is another implication, but it isn’t!
implication
In fact, since “p =>q” is logically equivalent to
In
the OR statement “~p V q” , the negation
“~(p=>q)” is logically equivalent to the negation
“~( ~p V q)” . This is the same as “~~p Λ ~q” .
~(
The double negation ~(~p) is just p. Thus
“~(p=>q)” is logically equivalent to “p Λ ~q”. We have just learned that the negation of an
implication is an AND statement.
implication
Example: Negate the statement “If it will rain I
Example:
will go to the movies.”
will
Here p: It will rain and q: I will go to the movies.
The negation of “p=>q” is “p Λ ~q”, which is:
The
“It will rain and I will not go to the movies.” Example: Negate the sentence: Studying daily
implies you will get good grades.
implies
Let p: (You) will study daily
q: You will get good grades.
q:
The given sentence is p=>q.
The
Its negation is p Λ ~q , which is the sentence:
“You will study daily and you will not get good
grades.” Converse and Contrapositive
Converse
In this lesson we learn two ways to create
In
a new implication from a given one.
new
Given a statement “If p then q” the
converse is the statement “If q then p”
converse
obtained by switching the positions of p
and q.
and
Example: Let p and q be the statements
p: I have brown hair
p:
q: I have brown eyes.
q: The implication “If p then q” is the statement
The
A: “If I have brown hair then I have brown eyes.”
The converse is the statement
B: “If I have brown eyes then I have brown hair.”
We will see that the truth or falsity of A has little
We
connection to the truth of falsity of B.
connection Here are the truth tables for A and for B:
Here
(A)
(B)
p
T
T
F
F q
T
F
T
F if p then q
T
F
T
T if q then p
T
T
F
T The last two columns are different, so the truth
The
table for A is not the same as that for B.
table It happens very frequently in ordinary speech
as
well as in mathematics that people confuse an
implication with its converse. Try to be aware of
this common but serious error so you don’t
make it!
make
The contrapositive of the implication
A: “If p then q”
is the statement
C: “If ~q then ~p”
C: To obtain the contrapositive of A, negate both p
and q and then reverse their positions.
Let p, q be the statements from before:
Let
p: I have brown hair.
q: I have brown eyes.
A: If I have brown hair then I have brown eyes.
The contrapositive of A is:
The
B: If I don’t have brown eyes, then I don’t have
B: The contrapositive sounds complicated. Its
importance comes from the fact that the
contrapositive is logically equivalent to the
original implication! One is true precisely when
the other is true. Here are the truth tables.
the
(A)
(B)
(A)
p
q ~q ~p
p 0q
~q0~p
~q
T
T
F
F
T
T
T
F
T
F
F
F
F
T
F
T
T
T
F
F
T
T
T
T We see that the last two columns are identical,
which says that “p0q” and its contrapositive
which
“~q0~p” have the same truth values. In other
~p”
words, they are logically equivalent, although
they sound quite different.
they
Observe: the converse of the converse is the
Observe:
original implication. And the contrapositive of
the contrapositive is the original implication.
the ...
View
Full Document
 Spring '10
 Briganti,Gustan,Perlis,Namikas,Wheeler
 Logic, Contrapositive, Logical connective, Logical implication

Click to edit the document details