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