Autosave: 2022-12-21 05:04:19
This commit is contained in:
parent
832f04de97
commit
f218b4b298
1 changed files with 17 additions and 15 deletions
|
@ -1,29 +1,29 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
categories:
|
||||
- Mathematics
|
||||
tags: [logic]
|
||||
- Logic
|
||||
tags: [propositional-logic]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Logical consistency
|
||||
|
||||
## Informal definition
|
||||
|
||||
A set of sentences is consistent if and only if **it is possible for all the members of the set to be true at the same time**. A set of sentences is inconsistent if and only if it is not consistent.
|
||||
A set of propositions is consistent if and only if **it is possible for all the members of the set to be true at the same time**. A set of propositions is inconsistent if and only if it is not consistent.
|
||||
|
||||
### Demonstration
|
||||
|
||||
The following set of sentences form an inconsistent set:
|
||||
The following set of propositions form an inconsistent set:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
(1) Anyone who takes astrology seriously is a lunatic.
|
||||
(2) Alice is my sister and no sister of mine has a lunatic for a husband.
|
||||
(3) David is Alice's husband and he read's the horoscope column every morning.
|
||||
(4) Anyone who reads the horoscope column every morning takes astrology seriously.
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. Anyone who takes astrology seriously is a lunatic.
|
||||
2. Alice is my sister and no sister of mine has a lunatic for a husband.
|
||||
3. David is Alice's husband and he read's the horoscope column every morning.
|
||||
4. Anyone who reads the horoscope column every morning takes astrology seriously.
|
||||
|
||||
The set is inconsistent because not all of them can be true. If (1), (3), (4) are true, (2) cannot be. If (2), (3),(4) are true, (1) cannot be.
|
||||
|
||||
## Formal definition
|
||||
|
||||
> A finite set of sentences $\Gamma$ is truth-functionally consistent if and only if there is at least one truth-assignment in which all sentences of $\Gamma$ are true.
|
||||
> A finite set of propositions $\Gamma$ is truth-functionally consistent if and only if there is at least one truth-assignment in which all propositions of $\Gamma$ are true.
|
||||
|
||||
### Informal expression
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -34,12 +34,14 @@ The book is brown
|
|||
|
||||
### Formal expression
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
{P v Q, Q}
|
||||
```
|
||||
$$
|
||||
\{P \lor Q, Q\}
|
||||
$$
|
||||
|
||||
### Truth-table
|
||||
|
||||
$ \{P, Q\} $ form a consistent set because there is at least one assignment when both propositions are true. In fact there are two (corresponding to each disjunct) but one is sufficient.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
P Q P ∨ Q Q
|
||||
T T T T *
|
||||
|
@ -50,7 +52,7 @@ F F F F
|
|||
|
||||
## Derivation
|
||||
|
||||
> In terms of logical derivation, a finite $\Gamma$ of propositions is **inconsistent** in a system of derivation for propositional logic if and only if a sentence of the $P & \sim P$ is derivable from $\Gamma$. It is **consistent** just if this is not the case.
|
||||
> In terms of logical derivation, a finite $\Gamma$ of propositions is **inconsistent** in a system of derivation for propositional logic if and only if a proposition of the $P & \sim P$ is derivable from $\Gamma$. It is **consistent** just if this is not the case.
|
||||
|
||||
In other terms, if you can derive a contradiction from the set, the set is logically inconsistent.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue