Contraries's definition and vacuous truth
Say,
$A: text{Every Americans use English.}$
$B: text{No American uses English.}$
$A$ and $B$ are said contarary.
People say that A and B are contrary when
A and B can not be both true but
A or B can be true exclusively or
A and B are both false.
($uparrow$ D)
But according to the vacuous truth statements, when we assume a possible world(C) where thee are no Americans at all, A and B can both be true!??
What is wrong with my assumption(C) or the definition (D)?
logic definition
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
add a comment |
Say,
$A: text{Every Americans use English.}$
$B: text{No American uses English.}$
$A$ and $B$ are said contarary.
People say that A and B are contrary when
A and B can not be both true but
A or B can be true exclusively or
A and B are both false.
($uparrow$ D)
But according to the vacuous truth statements, when we assume a possible world(C) where thee are no Americans at all, A and B can both be true!??
What is wrong with my assumption(C) or the definition (D)?
logic definition
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28
add a comment |
Say,
$A: text{Every Americans use English.}$
$B: text{No American uses English.}$
$A$ and $B$ are said contarary.
People say that A and B are contrary when
A and B can not be both true but
A or B can be true exclusively or
A and B are both false.
($uparrow$ D)
But according to the vacuous truth statements, when we assume a possible world(C) where thee are no Americans at all, A and B can both be true!??
What is wrong with my assumption(C) or the definition (D)?
logic definition
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
Say,
$A: text{Every Americans use English.}$
$B: text{No American uses English.}$
$A$ and $B$ are said contarary.
People say that A and B are contrary when
A and B can not be both true but
A or B can be true exclusively or
A and B are both false.
($uparrow$ D)
But according to the vacuous truth statements, when we assume a possible world(C) where thee are no Americans at all, A and B can both be true!??
What is wrong with my assumption(C) or the definition (D)?
logic definition
logic definition
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
asked Nov 21 '18 at 12:08
KYHSGeekCode
312112
312112
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28
add a comment |
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
See the Square of opposition.
The relation "being contrary of" is defined in traditional logic for Categorical propositions :
'Contrary' (medieval: contrariae) statements, are such that both cannot at the same time be true.
The issue is with the so-called problem of existential import :
"all $S$ are $P$" implicitly assumes that there are $S$'s in the domain.
In contrast, according to the modern squares of opposition, a view introduced in the 19th century by George Boole, universal claims lack existential import :
In the modern square of opposition, A and O claims are contradictories, as are E and I, but all other forms of opposition cease to hold; there are no contraries, subcontraries, or subalterns.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007647%2fcontrariess-definition-and-vacuous-truth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
See the Square of opposition.
The relation "being contrary of" is defined in traditional logic for Categorical propositions :
'Contrary' (medieval: contrariae) statements, are such that both cannot at the same time be true.
The issue is with the so-called problem of existential import :
"all $S$ are $P$" implicitly assumes that there are $S$'s in the domain.
In contrast, according to the modern squares of opposition, a view introduced in the 19th century by George Boole, universal claims lack existential import :
In the modern square of opposition, A and O claims are contradictories, as are E and I, but all other forms of opposition cease to hold; there are no contraries, subcontraries, or subalterns.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
add a comment |
See the Square of opposition.
The relation "being contrary of" is defined in traditional logic for Categorical propositions :
'Contrary' (medieval: contrariae) statements, are such that both cannot at the same time be true.
The issue is with the so-called problem of existential import :
"all $S$ are $P$" implicitly assumes that there are $S$'s in the domain.
In contrast, according to the modern squares of opposition, a view introduced in the 19th century by George Boole, universal claims lack existential import :
In the modern square of opposition, A and O claims are contradictories, as are E and I, but all other forms of opposition cease to hold; there are no contraries, subcontraries, or subalterns.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
add a comment |
See the Square of opposition.
The relation "being contrary of" is defined in traditional logic for Categorical propositions :
'Contrary' (medieval: contrariae) statements, are such that both cannot at the same time be true.
The issue is with the so-called problem of existential import :
"all $S$ are $P$" implicitly assumes that there are $S$'s in the domain.
In contrast, according to the modern squares of opposition, a view introduced in the 19th century by George Boole, universal claims lack existential import :
In the modern square of opposition, A and O claims are contradictories, as are E and I, but all other forms of opposition cease to hold; there are no contraries, subcontraries, or subalterns.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
See the Square of opposition.
The relation "being contrary of" is defined in traditional logic for Categorical propositions :
'Contrary' (medieval: contrariae) statements, are such that both cannot at the same time be true.
The issue is with the so-called problem of existential import :
"all $S$ are $P$" implicitly assumes that there are $S$'s in the domain.
In contrast, according to the modern squares of opposition, a view introduced in the 19th century by George Boole, universal claims lack existential import :
In the modern square of opposition, A and O claims are contradictories, as are E and I, but all other forms of opposition cease to hold; there are no contraries, subcontraries, or subalterns.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
answered Nov 21 '18 at 12:38
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
64.4k448112
64.4k448112
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007647%2fcontrariess-definition-and-vacuous-truth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
We can always write such a statement in the form "If P then Q". Here the statement "All Americans use English" would be "If x is an American then x speaks English" and "If x is an American then x does not speak English". A statement in the form "If P then Q" is said to be "vacuously true" if and only if the hypothesis, P, is false. If there exist no Americans then the hypothesis, "x is an American" must be false so, yes, in that case, both statements are "vacuously true".
– user247327
Nov 21 '18 at 12:27
This can be of some help tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/…
– Anupam
Nov 21 '18 at 12:28