Law of noncontradictionIn logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e. g. the two propositions "p is the case" and "p is not the case" are mutually exclusive. Formally, this is expressed as the tautology ¬(p ∧ ¬p). The law is not to be confused with the law of excluded middle which states that at least one, "p is the case" or "p is not the case" holds.
Statement (logic)In logic and semantics, the term statement is variously understood to mean either: a meaningful declarative sentence that is true or false, or a proposition. Which is the assertion that is made by (i.e., the meaning of) a true or false declarative sentence. In the latter case, a statement is distinct from a sentence in that a sentence is only one formulation of a statement, whereas there may be many other formulations expressing the same statement. By a statement, I mean "that which one states", not one's stating of it.
Hypothetical syllogismIn classical logic, a hypothetical syllogism is a valid argument form, a syllogism with a conditional statement for one or both of its premises. An example in English: If I do not wake up, then I cannot go to work. If I cannot go to work, then I will not get paid. Therefore, if I do not wake up, then I will not get paid. The term originated with Theophrastus. A pure hypothetical syllogism is a syllogism in which both premises and conclusions are conditionals.
Logical conjunctionIn logic, mathematics and linguistics, and () is the truth-functional operator of conjunction or logical conjunction. The logical connective of this operator is typically represented as or or (prefix) or or in which is the most modern and widely used. The and of a set of operands is true if and only if all of its operands are true, i.e., is true if and only if is true and is true. An operand of a conjunction is a conjunct.
Logical connectiveIn logic, a logical connective (also called a logical operator, sentential connective, or sentential operator) is a logical constant. They can be used to connect logical formulas. For instance in the syntax of propositional logic, the binary connective can be used to join the two atomic formulas and , rendering the complex formula . Common connectives include negation, disjunction, conjunction, implication, and equivalence.
Relevance logicRelevance logic, also called relevant logic, is a kind of non-classical logic requiring the antecedent and consequent of implications to be relevantly related. They may be viewed as a family of substructural or modal logics. It is generally, but not universally, called relevant logic by British and, especially, Australian logicians, and relevance logic by American logicians. Relevance logic aims to capture aspects of implication that are ignored by the "material implication" operator in classical truth-functional logic, namely the notion of relevance between antecedent and conditional of a true implication.
Axiomatic systemIn mathematics and logic, an axiomatic system is any set of axioms from which some or all axioms can be used in conjunction to logically derive theorems. A theory is a consistent, relatively-self-contained body of knowledge which usually contains an axiomatic system and all its derived theorems. An axiomatic system that is completely described is a special kind of formal system. A formal theory is an axiomatic system (usually formulated within model theory) that describes a set of sentences that is closed under logical implication.
Mathematical inductionMathematical induction is a method for proving that a statement is true for every natural number , that is, that the infinitely many cases all hold. Informal metaphors help to explain this technique, such as falling dominoes or climbing a ladder: Mathematical induction proves that we can climb as high as we like on a ladder, by proving that we can climb onto the bottom rung (the basis) and that from each rung we can climb up to the next one (the step). A proof by induction consists of two cases.
Modus ponensIn propositional logic, modus ponens (ˈmoʊdəs_ˈpoʊnɛnz; MP), also known as modus ponendo ponens (Latin for "method of putting by placing"), implication elimination, or affirming the antecedent, is a deductive argument form and rule of inference. It can be summarized as "P implies Q. P is true. Therefore Q must also be true." Modus ponens is closely related to another valid form of argument, modus tollens. Both have apparently similar but invalid forms such as affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and evidence of absence.
Modus tollensIn propositional logic, modus tollens (ˈmoʊdəs_ˈtɒlɛnz) (MT), also known as modus tollendo tollens (Latin for "method of removing by taking away") and denying the consequent, is a deductive argument form and a rule of inference. Modus tollens takes the form of "If P, then Q. Not Q. Therefore, not P." It is an application of the general truth that if a statement is true, then so is its contrapositive. The form shows that inference from P implies Q to the negation of Q implies the negation of P is a valid argument.
