Return to Video

Lecture 4-2 - Propositions & Propositional Connectives (24:18)

  • 0:05 - 0:11
    In the last lecture, I said that, we were
    going to spend this unit learning the
  • 0:11 - 0:18
    rules for evaluating deductive arguments.
    Now this week, we're gonna learn the rules
  • 0:18 - 0:24
    for evaluating deductive arguments that
    involve, what I'm gonna call propositional
  • 0:24 - 0:31
    connectives. Now, what are propositional
    connectives? Well, in order to explain
  • 0:31 - 0:37
    what propositional connectives are. I
    first have to tell you what propositions
  • 0:37 - 0:43
    are and then I can talk about connectives.
    So first, propositions. What's a
  • 0:43 - 0:49
    proposition? A proposition, is the kind of
    thing that can be true, or false and that
  • 0:49 - 0:55
    can serve as the premise, or the
    conclusion of an argument. Here let me
  • 0:55 - 1:07
    give you an example. See this book this
    book is not a proposition. It can't be
  • 1:07 - 1:13
    true or false, and it can't serve as the
    premise or the conclusion of an argument.
  • 1:14 - 1:22
    See this hand, this hand is not a
    proposition it can be true or false, and
  • 1:22 - 1:30
    it can serve as the premise or the
    conclusion of a argument. But now suppose
  • 1:30 - 1:41
    I say, the book is in my hand. Now what I
    just said, that the book is in my hand is
  • 1:41 - 1:48
    a proposition, it can be true in fact, it
    is true, or it can be false and right now
  • 1:48 - 1:54
    it is false. It can also serve as the
    premise of an argument. I could say, the
  • 1:54 - 2:01
    book is in my hand, therefore, my hand is
    not free to shake yours. And it could
  • 2:01 - 2:09
    serve as the conclusion of an argument. I
    could say, you just gave me the book and I
  • 2:09 - 2:15
    haven't let go of it, therefore, the book
    is in my hand. I just told you what
  • 2:15 - 2:21
    propositions are. But what's a
    propositional connective? A propositional
  • 2:21 - 2:27
    connective is something that takes
    propositions and makes new propositions
  • 2:27 - 2:33
    out of it. Let me give you an example to
    illustrate. Consider a proposition, the
  • 2:33 - 2:40
    book is under my hand. Now consider the
    proposition, my foot is under the book. We
  • 2:40 - 2:47
    can combine those two propositions using
    the propositional connective end to make
  • 2:47 - 2:55
    the new proposition. The book is under my
    hand, and by foot is under the book. Now
  • 2:55 - 3:01
    what I've just said that the book is under
    my hand and my foot is under the book,
  • 3:01 - 3:06
    that's a proposition. It's the kind of
    thing that could be true or false. For
  • 3:06 - 3:11
    instance, right now it's true and right
    now it's false. It's also the kind of
  • 3:11 - 3:16
    thing that can be premise or the
    conclusion of the argument. For instance,
  • 3:16 - 3:22
    I could say, what you're seeing right now
    is really happening, therefore, the book
  • 3:22 - 3:29
    is under my hand and my foot is under the
    book. Or I could say, the book is under my
  • 3:29 - 3:38
    hand, and my foot is under the book.
    Therefore, my foot is under my hand. So
  • 3:37 - 3:41
    you see that the book is under my hand,
    and my foot is under the book. That's the
  • 3:41 - 3:46
    kinda thing that can be true or false and
    it's the kind of thing that can be the
  • 3:46 - 3:51
    premise, or the conclusion of an argument.
    So it's a proposition, but it's a
  • 3:51 - 3:58
    proposition that we made by combining two
    other propositions. See how propositional
  • 3:58 - 4:05
    connectives work? They're beautiful,
    aren't they? I just gave you an example of
  • 4:05 - 4:11
    a propositional connective. I called it
    the proposition connective and. But in
  • 4:11 - 4:17
    English, the word and can be used in
    different ways. It's not always used as a
  • 4:17 - 4:23
    proposition connective. Let me give you
    different examples of how and can be used.
  • 4:23 - 4:30
    Think about the sentence, Jack and Jill
    finally talked. Okay now, there are three
  • 4:30 - 4:36
    different ways to understand what that
    sentence is saying. Jack and Jill could be
  • 4:36 - 4:43
    the name of a fast food company that
    serves a special stew that's very popular
  • 4:43 - 4:49
    with its patrons. Now, maybe lawyers have
    been wondering what the ingredients are in
  • 4:49 - 4:56
    Jack and Jill's special stew because many
    of Jack and Jill's patrons have been
  • 4:56 - 5:02
    coming down with an unusual disease. So,
    lawyers have been asking Jack and Jill to
  • 5:02 - 5:08
    disclose what's in their stew. Jack and
    Jill has been refusing to do so. But
  • 5:08 - 5:14
    finally, the spokesman for Jack and Jill
    discloses what's in their stew. I might
  • 5:14 - 5:20
    tell you about that situation by saying
    Jack and Jill finally talked. There, I'm
  • 5:20 - 5:26
    telling you there's a particular company,
    a company called Jack and Jill, and that
  • 5:26 - 5:33
    company finally talked through their
    spokesperson. Here's a second way to
  • 5:33 - 5:38
    understand the sentence, Jack and Jill
    finally talked. Suppose that Jack and Jill
  • 5:38 - 5:44
    ar e a couple, and recently they've been
    going through a tough time. They've been
  • 5:44 - 5:49
    angry and resentful towards each other.
    And they haven't talked about what's been
  • 5:49 - 5:55
    bothering them. Now, I might tell you,
    Jack and Jill finally talked. And what I
  • 5:55 - 6:01
    mean by that is, that they finally talked
    to each other about what's bothering them.
  • 6:01 - 6:07
    Now that's different, from the first
    example in which I said, Jack and Jill
  • 6:07 - 6:15
    finally talked. There, I was saying that a
    particular thing the company, Jack and
  • 6:15 - 6:22
    Jill. Finally talked about the ingredients
    in its special stew. But in this second
  • 6:22 - 6:28
    example, I'm saying that two things, Jack
    and Jill finally talked to each other. Let
  • 6:28 - 6:34
    me give you a third way to understand the
    sentence Jack and Jill finally talked.
  • 6:34 - 6:40
    Imagine that Jack, Jill, and Roger are
    having a silence contest. They're having a
  • 6:40 - 6:46
    contest to see who can go for the longest
    period of time without talking. And I'm
  • 6:46 - 6:53
    watching them to see who wins. Well, you
    call be periodically and ask me as anyone
  • 6:53 - 7:00
    of them talked? And for the first few
    hours I might say to you nope, none of
  • 7:00 - 7:07
    them has talked yet. And then at one point
    you call me and you ask me, has anyone of
  • 7:07 - 7:15
    them talked? And I say well Jack and Jill
    finally talked. Now here I'm not saying
  • 7:15 - 7:23
    that Jack or Jill talked to each other.
    I'm saying that Jack finally talked, and
  • 7:23 - 7:33
    Jill finally talked. So, when I say Jack
    and Jill finally talked. I'm expressing a
  • 7:33 - 7:40
    proposition that's made up of two other
    propositions. The proposition that Jack
  • 7:40 - 7:48
    finally talked, and the proposition that
    Jill finally talked. When I say Jack and
  • 7:48 - 7:55
    Jill finally talked, I'm using the word
    and, as a propositional connective. It
  • 7:55 - 8:02
    takes two propositions. First, that Jack
    finally talked, adn second that Jill
  • 8:02 - 8:09
    finally talked. And it combines those two
    propositions into a third proposition. The
  • 8:09 - 8:15
    proposition that, Jack and Jill. Finally
    talked. Now that's a third way to
  • 8:15 - 8:20
    understand the sentence Jack and Jill
    finally talked and it's different from the
  • 8:20 - 8:25
    first two. But that's the only way of
    understanding the word and, so that it's a
  • 8:25 - 8:30
    propositional conn ective in that
    sentence. So I've just explained to you
  • 8:30 - 8:35
    what propositional connectives are. I gave
    you an example of a propositional
  • 8:35 - 8:41
    connective and, and I showed how the
    English word and, can sometimes be used as
  • 8:41 - 8:46
    a propositional connective but sometimes
    not. Now the English language like every
  • 8:46 - 8:52
    other natural language, contains lots and
    lots of different phrases that can be used
  • 8:52 - 8:58
    as propositional connectives. For
    instance, consider the phrase, I believe
  • 8:58 - 9:04
    that. You tell me Jack and Jill finally
    talked. Well, I might say I believe that
  • 9:04 - 9:10
    Jack and Jill finally talked. There, I'm
    taking one proposition Jack and Jill
  • 9:10 - 9:16
    finally talked, and attaching the phrase
    to it, I believe that to make another
  • 9:16 - 9:23
    proposition namely, I believe that Jack
    and Jill finally talked. Or consider the
  • 9:23 - 9:29
    phrase, I hate it when. You might tell me,
    it's raining, and I might say, I hate it
  • 9:29 - 9:35
    when it's raining. See there, I take the
    proposition it's raining, and I attach a
  • 9:35 - 9:41
    phrase to it, I hate it when, to make
    another proposition, I hate it when it's
  • 9:41 - 9:47
    raining. So these are other examples of
    how phrases in English, I believe that, or
  • 9:47 - 9:53
    I hate it when, can be used as
    propositional connectives. They can take
  • 9:53 - 9:58
    other propositions and make new
    propositions out of them. But and is a
  • 9:58 - 10:04
    very different kind of propositional
    connective from I believe that or I hate
  • 10:04 - 10:09
    it when. And it's different in two ways.
    One way it's different is that it makes a
  • 10:09 - 10:14
    new proposition out of two other
    propositions, not just one other
  • 10:14 - 10:19
    proposition. So when you make a new
    proposition by attaching I hate it when to
  • 10:19 - 10:25
    another proposition, what you're doing is
    turning one proposition into another
  • 10:25 - 10:30
    proposition. But when you make a new
    proposition by combining two other
  • 10:30 - 10:36
    propositions using the word and, you're
    making a new proposition out of two other
  • 10:36 - 10:42
    propositions. Jack finally talked, and
    Jill finally talked. You make the new
  • 10:42 - 10:48
    proposition, Jack and Jill finally talked.
    That's one way in which the propositional
  • 10:48 - 10:53
    connective and is different from the
    propositional connective, I hate it when.
  • 10:54 - 10:59
    But there's a second wa y, in which the
    propositional connective, and, differs
  • 10:59 - 11:05
    from the propositional connective, I hate
    it when. And that is, that when you use
  • 11:05 - 11:11
    the propositional connective and, to
    combine two other propositions into a new
  • 11:11 - 11:17
    proposition. Whether that proposition is
    true or false doesn't depend upon anything
  • 11:17 - 11:22
    other than whether the two original
    propositions that you used to build it
  • 11:22 - 11:29
    were true or false, that's all it depends
    upon. Let me illustrate this point using
  • 11:29 - 11:35
    something we call a truth table. A truth
    table is a way of representing various
  • 11:35 - 11:42
    possible situations, and how the truth of
    a proposition depends upon which of those
  • 11:42 - 11:49
    various possible situations is real. For
    instance, consider the two possibilities
  • 11:49 - 11:56
    there are with Jack finally talked. The
    proposition Jack finally taught, could be
  • 11:56 - 12:02
    true. Or it could be false. The
    proposition Jill finally talked could be
  • 12:02 - 12:08
    true or it could be false. So, there are
    four possibilities we have to consider.
  • 12:08 - 12:15
    Either Jack finally talked is true and
    Jill finally talked is true. Or Jack
  • 12:15 - 12:22
    finally talked is true and Jill finally
    talked is false. Or Jack finally talked is
  • 12:22 - 12:29
    false and Jill finally talked is true. Or
    finally, Jack finally talked is false and
  • 12:29 - 12:35
    Jill finally talked is false. Those are
    the four possible situations. Now, if the
  • 12:35 - 12:41
    first of those four situations is the real
    situation, so it's true that Jack finally
  • 12:41 - 12:46
    talked and it's true that Jill finally
    talked, then is it going to be true or
  • 12:46 - 12:53
    false that Jack and Jill finally talked?
    It's going to be true. All right, cuz Jack
  • 12:53 - 13:00
    finally talked, and Jill finally talked,
    so Jack and Jill finally talked. Now
  • 13:00 - 13:06
    suppose it's true that Jack finally
    talked, but it's false that Jill finally
  • 13:06 - 13:11
    talked. Then is it going to be true or
    false that Jack and Jill finally talked?
  • 13:11 - 13:18
    It'll be false, and suppose it's false
    that Jack finally talked, but it's true
  • 13:18 - 13:24
    that Jill finally talked. Then, is it
    going to be true or false that Jack and
  • 13:24 - 13:30
    Jill finally talked, again it's going to
    be false. And finally, suppose it's false
  • 13:30 - 13:35
    that Jack finally talked and it's also
    false that Jill final ly talked. Then is
  • 13:35 - 13:40
    it going to be true or false that Jack and
    Jill finally talked? Well obviously in
  • 13:40 - 13:46
    that situation, it's going to be false
    that Jack and Jill finally talked. So what
  • 13:46 - 13:53
    this truth table demonstrates is that the
    truth of the proposition Jack and Jill
  • 13:53 - 13:59
    finally talked. Just depends, it depends
    on nothing other than the truth of the
  • 13:59 - 14:04
    proposition Jack finally talked, and the
    truth of the proposition Jill finally
  • 14:04 - 14:09
    talked. In other words, the truth of the
    proposition that we've use the
  • 14:09 - 14:14
    propositional connective and to build.
    Depends on nothing other than the truth of
  • 14:14 - 14:19
    the two ingredient propositions that we
    connected by means of the propositional
  • 14:19 - 14:25
    connective and. Because the propositional
    connective and, works that way because it
  • 14:25 - 14:30
    builds new propositions whose truth
    depends on nothing other than the truth of
  • 14:30 - 14:36
    the ingredient propositions that go into
    building them. That kind of propositional
  • 14:36 - 14:41
    connective is one that we're going to call
    a truth functional connective. Now and,
  • 14:41 - 14:47
    the propositional connective and, is a
    truth-functional connective. But not all
  • 14:47 - 14:52
    propositional connectives are
    truth-functional connectives. For
  • 14:52 - 14:58
    instance, suppose we try to construct a
    truth table for I hate it when, the
  • 14:58 - 15:05
    propositional connective I hate it when.
    Well, so consider the proposition, it's
  • 15:05 - 15:11
    raining. Now that proposition could be
    true or it could be false. Sometimes its
  • 15:11 - 15:18
    true, sometimes its false. So lets
    consider these two possible situations. So
  • 15:18 - 15:25
    suppose the proposition Its raining is
    true. In that situation is it going to be
  • 15:25 - 15:32
    true or false that I hated when its
    raining. Could be either one, it could be
  • 15:32 - 15:39
    raining even though I enjoyed the rain or
    it could be raining even though I hate the
  • 15:39 - 15:45
    rain. Or it could be raining even though
    I'm indifferent to the rain. So the truth,
  • 15:45 - 15:54
    of I hate it when it's raining isn't
    determined by its raining. So, if it's
  • 15:54 - 16:00
    true that it's raining. It's unclear
    whether, I hate it when it's raining.
  • 16:00 - 16:06
    Could be true, could be false. Suppose
    it's false, that it's raining. Then, is it
  • 16:06 - 16:12
    going to be true or false that I hate it
    when it's raining. Again, could be either
  • 16:12 - 16:18
    one. The truth of I hate it when it's
    raining isn't determined by the falsehood
  • 16:18 - 16:24
    of it's raining. So, even if it's not
    raining, that doesn't mean anything one
  • 16:24 - 16:30
    way or the other for whether I hate it
    when it's raining. So once again, if it's
  • 16:30 - 16:37
    false that it's raining, I hate it when
    it's raining, could be true or could be
  • 16:37 - 16:44
    false. So the proposition, I hated when
    it's raining. Whether that proposition is
  • 16:44 - 16:51
    true or false doesn't just depend on the
    truth or the falsehood of the proposition
  • 16:51 - 16:58
    it's raining, that you built this
    proposition out of using the propositional
  • 16:58 - 17:05
    connective, I hate it when. Because of
    that, the propositional connective I hate
  • 17:05 - 17:10
    it when is not a truth-functional
    connective. It's different from the
  • 17:10 - 17:17
    propositional connective and which is a
    truth-functional connective. A moment ago,
  • 17:17 - 17:23
    we built a truth table for a proposition
    that was built using a truth-functional
  • 17:23 - 17:29
    connective, specifically the
    truth-functional connective and. But I'd
  • 17:29 - 17:36
    like us to notice something about that
    truth table. Notice that if we replace the
  • 17:36 - 17:41
    particular propositions that we are
    putting together using the
  • 17:41 - 17:47
    truth-functional connective and, to make a
    different resultant proposition. Even if
  • 17:47 - 17:54
    we change the ingredient propositions the
    truth table looks the same. Let me show
  • 17:54 - 18:00
    you what I mean. Suppose instead of having
    Jack and Jill finally talked. We have Jack
  • 18:00 - 18:05
    finally walked and Jill finally talked. So
    now, we're connecting two different
  • 18:05 - 18:11
    propositions using the truth-functional
    connective and. There's Jack finally
  • 18:11 - 18:17
    walked, there's Jill finally talked. And
    then we connect them up into Jack finally
  • 18:17 - 18:23
    walked and Jill finally talked. Okay, now
    the truth of that resultant proposition,
  • 18:23 - 18:28
    Jack finally walked and Jill finally
    talked. How does that depend on the truth
  • 18:28 - 18:33
    or false sort of the ingredient
    propositions?Jack Jack finally walked and
  • 18:33 - 18:39
    Jill finally talked. Well it's the same
    patent we saw earlier. If it's true that
  • 18:39 - 18:45
    Jack finally walked, and it's also true
    that Jill finally talked. and it's also
  • 18:45 - 18:49
    true that Jill finally tal ked.
    Then it's going to be true that Jack
  • 18:49 - 18:55
    finally walked and Jill finally talked. If
    it's true that Jack finally walked, but
  • 18:55 - 19:00
    it's false that Jill finally talked, then
    it's going to be false that Jack finally
  • 19:00 - 19:05
    walked and Jill finally talked. If it's
    false that Jack finally walked but it's
  • 19:05 - 19:11
    true that Jill finally talked, then it's
    going to be false that Jack finally walked
  • 19:11 - 19:16
    and Jill finally talked. And if it's false
    that Jack finally walked and it's false
  • 19:16 - 19:21
    that Jill finally talked, then it's going
    to be false that Jack finally walked and
  • 19:21 - 19:28
    Jill finally talked. So even if we change
    one of the ingredient propositions as long
  • 19:28 - 19:34
    as we're combining propositions using the
    truth functional connective and, the
  • 19:34 - 19:42
    overall truth table looks the same. We
    could change them some more to illustrate
  • 19:42 - 19:48
    this point. I suppose if we changed Jill
    finally talked to the zebra escaped.
  • 20:00 - 20:10
    Change it here, so notice what we have
    here. We take two propositions, the
  • 20:12 - 20:20
    proposition Jack finally walked, and the
    proposition the zebra escaped. And we put
  • 20:20 - 20:28
    them together with the truth functional
    connective, and to create a resultant
  • 20:28 - 20:35
    proposition Jack finally walked and the
    zebra escaped. Now, when is that
  • 20:35 - 20:43
    proposition gonna be true? Well, again it
    depends just on, when these propositions
  • 20:43 - 20:48
    are true. So if it's true, that Jack
    finally walked, and it's also true that
  • 20:48 - 20:54
    the zebra escaped, then it's going to be
    true that Jack finally walked and the
  • 20:54 - 20:59
    zebra escaped. If it's true that Jack
    finally walked, but it's false that the
  • 20:59 - 21:03
    zebra escaped, then it's going to be false
    that Jack finally walked and the zebra
  • 21:03 - 21:08
    escaped. If it's false that Jack finally
    walked and it's true that the zebra
  • 21:08 - 21:13
    escaped, then it's going to be false that
    Jack finally walked and the zebra escaped.
  • 21:13 - 21:17
    And finally, if it's false that Jack
    finally walked and it's false that the
  • 21:17 - 21:22
    zebra escaped, then of course it's going
    to be false that Jack finally walked and
  • 21:22 - 21:27
    the zebra escaped. So once again, same
    truth table even if we change the
  • 21:27 - 21:33
    ingredient propositions that we're putting
    together with the functional connective an
  • 21:33 - 21:40
    d to make the resultive proposition. Now,
    since the truth table stays the same even
  • 21:40 - 21:48
    when we change these propositions up on
    top. We could represent that fact, by
  • 21:48 - 21:55
    replacing these propositions altogether
    with variables that can range over any
  • 21:55 - 22:03
    proposition. So, for instance, instead of
    saying Jack finally walked, we could just
  • 22:03 - 22:11
    have a variable here call it P1 Our first
    proposition. Instead of saying the zebra
  • 22:11 - 22:18
    escaped we can have a variable there, call
    it P2 our second proposition. And finally,
  • 22:18 - 22:27
    when we put those two propositions
    together using the truth functional
  • 22:27 - 22:36
    connective and. We'll have P1 one and. P2.
    So that's going to be our resultant
  • 22:36 - 22:43
    proposition, P1 and P2. And whatever
    exactly that is, is going to depend of
  • 22:43 - 22:51
    course on what P1 is and what P2 is. But
    whether this third proposition is true or
  • 22:51 - 22:59
    false again is only going to depend on the
    truth or falsehood of P1 and of P2, when
  • 22:59 - 23:08
    P1 whatever exactly that is, is true and
    P2 is true then. The proposition p1 and p2
  • 23:08 - 23:16
    is going to be true. Whatever proposition
    that is, is going to be true. And in every
  • 23:16 - 23:24
    other possible situation, that proposition
    is going to be false. So no matter what
  • 23:24 - 23:32
    proposition we have for P1 and P2 their
    conjunction P1 and P2 is going to be true,
  • 23:32 - 23:40
    just in those situations when P1 and P2
    are both true. That's the truth table for
  • 23:40 - 23:46
    the truth functional connective and, which
    we'll also call conjunction. In the next
  • 23:46 - 23:52
    lecture, we're going to see how we can use
    the truth table for the truth functional
  • 23:52 - 23:58
    connective and. To figure out the rules
    for evaluating deductive arguments that
  • 23:58 - 24:04
    rely on the truth functional connected
    and. And in the following three lectures,
  • 24:04 - 24:11
    we'll see how we can use the truth tables
    for other truth functional connectives, to
  • 24:11 - 24:17
    figure out the rules for evaluating
    deductive arguments that use those other
  • 24:17 - 24:19
    connectives. See you in next lecture.
Title:
Lecture 4-2 - Propositions & Propositional Connectives (24:18)

English subtitles

Revisions