In these two videos we introduce deduction -- deriving conclusions from assumptions -- this a fundamental topic in logic.
This set of slides is split between two videos, to allow you space to think.
We start by introducing barbara, the simplest classical syllogism, and the proposition, "all a are b", known as universal assertion. We introduce the mathematical setting we will use for our investigation of deduction, briefly review Euler diagrams, and introduce Venn diagrams.
Once you have watched the video above, check your understanding by drawing a few Euler diagrams and the corresponding Venn diagrams, each for a universe with three predicates. How many different Euler diagrams can you draw for three predicates?
Once you've done that, you're ready for the next video.
In the second video, we return to discuss the relationship between Euler and Venn diagrams, and introduce some notation.
Having watched this video, you should be able to count how many different Euler diagrams there should be for three predicates. Can you draw them all?
You should also check you can recognise and name the following
symbols:
¬ ⋀ ⋁ ⊨
.
Which of the following are valid in the universe represented by this Euler diagram?
a ⊨ b ?
a ⊨ b
b ⊨ c ?
b ⊭ c
c ⊨ ¬a ?
c ⊨ ¬a
a ⊨ ¬c ?
a ⊨ ¬c
b ⊨ ¬c ?
b ⊭ ¬c
b ⊨ a ?
b ⊭ ¬a
We use Venn diagrams to show that barbara is sound.
Here are three Venn diagrams, 1, 2, 3, and three Euler diagrams, A, B, C. There are the two matching pairs, for which the Euler diagram represents a universe in which every unshaded region in the Venn diagram is inhabited.
The challenge is to first select the non-matching pair. Then you can select the two matching pairs. For the non-matching pair, find a Venn diagram to match the Euler diagram and vice versa.
1 - A
a ∧
b
empty.1 - B ?
1 - C ?
2 - A
2 - B ?
2 - C ?
3 - A
3 - B ?
¬a ∧ ¬b ∧ c
is shaded, but this region appears
in the Euler diagram.3 - C ?
¬a ∧ ¬b ∧ c
is shaded, but this region appears
in the Euler diagram.Our second syllogism requires a new form of proposition --
universal denial.
Introducing negation gives a new syllogism as an
instance of barbara.
We introduce the logic of negation.
Which of the following is equivalent to a ⊨ b
? When they
are not equivalent, give a counterexample, by taking a ⊨
b
to be, "Every man is mortal" and describing what the
invalid proposition in question would say in English.
No, b ⊨ a
b ⊭ a
; every man is
mortal, but it's not the case that every mortal is a man. (Think of
Socrates' pet cat.)
No, ¬a ⊨ ¬b
¬a ⊭ ¬b
; Socrates' cat
is not a man, but Socrates' cat is not immortal.
No, a ⊨ ¬b
a ⊭ ¬b
; it's not the
case that every man is immortal; for example, Socrates is not immortal.
YES, ¬b ⊨ ¬a
¬b ⊨ ¬a
; If every man
is mortal, then every immortal is not a man, or to say it
differently, no immortal is a man.
Syllogisms for free! We see how some simple reasoning allows us to derive three more syllogisms.
This is a syllogism named Camestres.
You should first use the Venn diagram method to convince yourself that this syllogism is sound. You can do this by reasoning about the regions in the Venn diagram that are empty.
Which of the following rules may be derived from Camestres using a single predicate contraposition?
a ⊨ b
c ⊨ ¬b
c ⊨ ¬a
a ⊨ b
c ⊨ ¬b
c ⊨ ¬a
a ⊨ b
c ⊨ ¬b
c ⊨ ¬a
a ⊨ b
c ⊨ ¬b
c ⊨ ¬a
Legacy recording from a lecture delivered in 2019— you can use this to check your understanding.
You should listen at least from 28m02 onwards, where I propose a problem for you to ponder.
The video ends with a question that leads to another form of contraposition: contraposition of propositions. This will lead us to more syllogisms for free. We encourage you to think about your answer concerning the rules for sale of alcohol in Scotland, and try to generalise what you have learnt to our original rule, Barbara, to derive two more new syllogisms.
Don't worry if this doesn't make sense, or if you've run out of time. We will look at this idea in detail next week.