Module 2

Logic and Reasoning

Introduction

Logic plays a very important role in mathematics – it is the foundation on which the
discipline is built. Remember all the proofs you had to write to establish some
theorems in algebra and geometry? You start with the given assumptions, use
definitions and perhaps some known results, and argue logically to establish the
conclusion. We consider mathematics as a language with its own symbols and
“grammar”. These symbols may represent various mathematical objects like
numbers, sets, or functions. The grammar will be the rules when combining these
symbols. We apply logic to deduce properties of these objects and rules based on
some axioms. One cannot overemphasize the importance of logic in mathematics,
but logic, or logical reasoning, is just as important in our everyday life. In this era of
fake news, post-truths, false advertising, we must be able to discern what is true or
false. We should be able to determine if a certain argument is valid or not.

Learning Outcomes
After studying this module, you should be able to:
1. Determine whether a statement has truth value;
2. Negate simple and compound statements;
3. Describe the various forms of the conditional;
4. Use truth tables to determine the truth value of a statement;
5. Determine whether an argument is valid or invalid using Euler diagrams or
truth tables; and
6. Illustrate deductive and inductive reasoning.

1.0 Mathematical Statements and Connectives

In this section, we shall study a very basic object in mathematical logic, statements,
and operations and relations on statements. These will be important when we
discuss valid and invalid arguments.

1.1 Mathematical Statements

A mathematical statement is a statement that can be assigned a truth value and

classified as true or false, but not both. Lowercase letters, p,q,r,s,...., are used to
represent mathematical statements.
LOGIC AND REASONING

Example 1.1 The following are mathematical statements:

p:1+1=2
q:2+3=6
r : All roses are red.
s : The Philippines has more than 7,100 islands.
Note that p and s are true statements while q and r are false. Note that all the above
statements are declarative statements. In other words, mathematical statements are
declarative sentences that are either true or false, but not both.
We shall not consider declarative statements whose truth value is not clear or a
matter of opinion as mathematical statements. Questions, exclamations, and
imperatives are not considered as mathematical statements as well, since these
sentences do not have a truth value.

Example 1.2 The following are NOT mathematical statements:

1) Happy Birthday!
2) Message me.

3) Can we be friends?
4) 5+1
5) x+3=0
6) Mathematics is interesting.
7) 7 is a lucky number.

The first three sentences do not have a truth value and note that they are not
declarative statements. The expressions “5 + 1” and “x + 3 = 0” may seem to be
mathematical statement because they involve mathematical symbols, but they
have no truth value, and in fact, have no meaning. However, “For all numbers x, x
+ 3 = 0” is a mathematical statement which is false. Statements (6) and (7) are
declarative statements but are not considered as mathematical statements since
they have no definite truth value. In particular, mathematics may be interesting for
some people, so it could be true for these people, but false for those who find
mathematics boring. In the same manner, some people might consider 7 as their
lucky number and some may think of this as false. In fact, the sentence is vague
since “lucky” has to be defined. However, the statement “7 is an odd number” is a
true mathematical statement.

EXERCISES 1.1
Determine whether the following are mathematical statements or not.

1. Math 10 is a GE course. 6. π is a special number.

2. What is your name? 7. The chairs are pink or the earth is round.
3. I am a UP student. 8. 3+4–5
4. x<y 9. If cats are mammals, then mice are

Page 2 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

5. Please open the door. reptiles.

10. Let us dance.

1.2 Operations on Statements: The Connectives

We consider the following operations on statements and their notations. These will
give us ways to combine two statements p and q:
1. Conjunction “p and q”
p∧ q
2. Disjunction "p or q"
p∨ q
3. Conditional "If p then q"
p→q
Statement p is called the premise and q is called the conclusion.

4. Biconditional "p if and only if q"

p↔q
The biconditional means p → q and q → p, that is, it is the conjunction of
the p → q and q → p. In symbols, (p → q) ∧ (q → p).

5. Negation "not p "

~p

Except for the negation, all the operations are binary, that is, they involve two
statements at a time.

Example 1.3 The statements in Example 1.1 can form the following compound
statements using connectives:
1. p ∧ q : 1 + 1 = 2 and 2 + 3 = 6.
2. r ∨ s : All roses are red or the Philippines has more than 7,000 islands.
3. p → s : If 1+1=2 then the Philippines has more than 7,000 islands.
4. q ↔ r : 2 + 3 = 6 if and only if all roses are red.
5. ~p : 1+1 ≠ 2

Are the resulting statements using the connectives still considered mathematical
statements? That is, do they have a truth value? For the operations on
mathematical statements to be "legitimate" or well-defined operations, the result

Page 3 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

must also be a mathematical statement that is, it must have a truth value. We now
define when the above are true and when they are false:
1. The conjunction p ∧q is true if both p and q are true. Otherwise, it is false.
2. The disjunction p ∨ q is true if at least one statement (p, q, or both) is true.
It is false only if both statements are false.
3. The conditional p → q is false only when the premise p is true and the
conclusion q is false. Otherwise, it is true.
4. The biconditional p ↔ q is true if p and q have the same truth value, that is,
either p and q both true or both are false.
5. The negation ~ p is true if p is false. If p is true, ~p is false.

Example 1.4 In Example1.3, since p and s are true while q and r are false, we
have
1. p ∧ q is false
2. r ∨ s is true
3. p → s is true
4. q ↔ r is true
5. ~p is false.

In cases of operations on compound statements, we use delimiters, ( ), { }, [ ], to

group statements together. For example, the statement ( p ∧ q) ∨ (r → ~q) is the
disjunction of the conjunction (p ∧ q) and the conditional (r → ~q).

Example 1.5 Let p, q, r be true statements.

1. Determine the truth value of the following:
a. p ∨ (q ∧ r)
b. p → ~q
c. (~p ∨ q) → ~r
2. Determine the truth value of statement s if [( p ∧ q ) ↔ ( ~ r ∨ s)] is
false.
Solutions:
1. In evaluating statements with delimeters, we first evaluate statement inside the
delimeters.
a. Since q and r are true, the conjunction (q ∧ r) is true. Since p is also true
the disjunction p ∨ (q ∧ r) is therefore TRUE.

Page 4 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

b. Since q is true, ~q is false. So the conditional p → ~q is FALSE since the

premise p is true and the conclusion ~q is false.
c. We first evaluate (p ∧ q). Since p is true, ~p is false so the conjunction of
~p and q is false. On the other hand, ~r is also false so the conditional (~p
∧ q) → ~r is TRUE.
2. The statement ( p ∧ q ) is true. For the statement [( p∧ q ) ↔ ( ~ r ∨ s)] to
be false, ( ~ r ∨ s) must be false (from the condition that both must have the
same truth value for “↔” to be true). Now, ~ r is false so for ( ~ r ∨ s) to be
false, statement s must be false

EXERCISES 1.2: Let p, q, r be true statements.

1. Determine the truth value of the following:
a. p ∨ (q ∧ r)
b. p → ~q
c. p ↔ ~q
d. (~ p ∨ q) → ~r
e. (~p ∧ q) ∨ ~(r → ~q)
2. Determine whether the following statements can have the given truth value
(in parentheses) for some statement s, and specify the truth value of s
whenever possible. Justify your answers.
a. ( p ∨ q ) ∧ ~s (TRUE)
b. [(p ∧ s ) → ( q ∨ r)] (TRUE)
c. [( p ∧ q ) ↔ ( r ∨ s)] (FALSE)

1.3 Truth Tables

We can use truth tables to represent the truth values of the compound statements
discussed above. We consider all possible cases for p and q (True (T) or False (F)).
Note that there are four cases when two statements are considered:

p q

T T

T F

F T

F F

Page 5 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

We present the truth tables for the conjunction, disjunction, conditional and
biconditional. Recall when the statements resulting from connectives are either
true or false.

1. Conjunction p ∧ q (true only when both p and q are true)

p q p∧ q

T T T

T F F

F T F

F F F

2. Disjunction p ∨ q (false only when both p and q are false)

p q p∨ q

T T T

T F T

F T T

F F F

3. Conditional p → q (false only when the premise is true and the conclusion is
false)

p q p→q

T T T

T F F

F T T

F F T

Page 6 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

4. Biconditional p ↔ q (true only when p and q have the same truth value)

p q p↔q

T T T

T F F

F T F

F F T

5. Negation ~p

p ~p

T F

T T

If there are two statements, as seen above, there are 4 = 22 rows in the table
showing all possible cases. If there are three statements, there are 23 = 8 cases. In
general, if there are n statements, there are 2n cases.
Example 1.6 Construct a truth table for the following statements
1. p → ~q
2. (~p ∧ q) → ~r

Solutions:
1. For p → ~q, we have

p q ~q p → ~q

T T F T

T F T F

F T F T

F F T T

2. There are three (3) statements, p, q, r, so there are 23 = 8 possible cases for
all combinations of truth values of p, q, r.

Page 7 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

p q r ~p (~p ∧ q) ~r (~p ∧ q) → ~r

T T T F F F T

T T F F F T T

T F T F F F T

T F F F F T T

F T T T T F F

F T F T T T T

F F T T F F T

F F F T F T T

Note that the first row of the given table (p, q, r are all true) corresponds to
Example 1.5 (3).

EXERCISES 1.3
Construct a truth table for the following statements.
1. p ↔ ~q
2. ~ q → ~ p
3. (~ p ∨ q) ↔ (p → q)
4. p ∨ (q ∧ r)
5. (~p ∧ q) ∨ ~ (r → ~q)

1.4 Relations on Statements

In the previous section, we defined the possible operations on statements that are
used to construct compound statements. The resulting compound statement has a
truth value although it may or may not make sense. For example, the statement “If
all roses are red, then all violets are blue.” This is a true statement (F → F) but it is
not materially true (the two statements are not related). We have conditionals p → q
and biconditionals p ↔ q that actually make sense or are materially true. We
consider two relations on statements, implication and equivalence.

Page 8 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

1. Implication. We know for a fact that all cats are mammals. This means that if an
animal is a cat, then it is a mammal. We can state this as “If it is a cat, then it is
a mammal.” This is not just a compound statement with the connective “ → “,
rather a material implication. So, if something is a cat, it is also true that it is also
a mammal. We call this relation an implication, denoted by “ ⇒ ” . Hence, if
statement p (materially) implies statement q, we denote this by “p ⇒ q ” (read
as p implies q).

2. Equivalence. On the other hand, we may also have statements which are
equivalent. We usually see this in definitions and compound statements which
may be restated in another way. Consider the definition “A polygon is a triangle
if and only if it has three sides”. This actually means that the statements
p: A polygon is a triangle.
q: A polygon has three sides.
are equivalent. In this case, we may replace p with statement q. We denote the
equivalence of two statements p and q by p ⇔ q.

In the following sections, we shall discuss further negation of statements and the
conditional and in these discussions, we can find more examples of equivalent
compound statements. Note that we can determine the equivalence of two
compound statements by comparing their truth tables. If they have the same truth
value for each case, then they are equivalent.

Example 1.7 Using a truth table, show that ~ ( p ∧ q ) ⇔ ~p ∨ ~q .

Solution: We consider the four cases for the truth values of p and q and if for each
case ~( p ∧ q ) has the same truth value as ~p ∨ ~q, the two statements are
equivalent.

p q ~p ~q p∧q ∼(p∧q) ∼p∨∼q

T T F F T F F

T F F T F T T

F T T F F T T

F F T T F T T

Observe that for each case, the two statements have the same truth value so
∼ ( p ∧ q ) is equivalent to ∼ p ∨ ∼ q. This implies the negation of the conjunction
of p and q may be restated as the disjunction of the negation of p and the negation
of q. (See Section 2.2 for examples illustrating negation of compound statements.)
Page 9 of 36 July 2018
LOGIC AND REASONING

EXERCISES 1.4
1. Prove the following equivalences using truth tables:
a. ~ ( p ∨ q ) ⇔ ~p ∧ ~q
b. (p → q) ⇔ ( ~p ∨ q )

2. Give examples of implications and equivalences encountered in everyday

life.

2 Negation of Statements

Suppose someone claims that Brand X is both cheap and good and you would like
to disagree and state the opposite. Or your teacher tells you that if you work hard
then you will get an excellent grade, and you know (from experience) that this is not
true. It is important to know how to determine the opposite of a statement, that is, to
negate a given statement.

2.1 Negation of Simple Statements

To negate simple statements, we add the word “not”, as appropriate. Let us illustrate
this with the statements given in Example 1.1.

Example 2.1 Negate the statements given in Example 1.1.

Statement Negation

p : 1+1 = 2 ~p : 1+1 ≠ 2
q:2+3=6 ~q : 2 + 3 ≠ 6
r : All roses are red. ~r : Not all roses are red.
s : The Philippines has more than ~s : The Philippines has at most
7,000 islands. 7,000 islands.

Remarks : Refer to the given statements in the above example.

1. Statement p: 1 + 1 = 2 reads “1 + 1 is equal to 2” so its negation ~ p is simply
“1 + 1 is not equal to 2” or in symbols “ 1+1 ≠ 2”.

Page 10 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

2. In statement s, the word “all” is an example of a quantifier and it is negated

as “ not all”. It is incorrect to negate this statement as “All roses are not red.”
In Section 2.3, we shall encounter other quantifiers and ways of negating
them. Moreover, it is also incorrect to change the adjective “red” to another
color, say pink. In general, for statements with adjectives, replacing the
adjective with its antonym or another adjective is not equivalent to negating
the statement.

3. Note that the phrase “more than” is negated as “at most” (see statement t
above) and NOT as “less than”. In our example, we can express the
statement as an inequality “7,000 < x” (or x < 7,000), where x is the number
of islands in the Philippines. To negate “<”, recall that given two numbers y
and z, there are only three possibilities: y < z, y = z, or y > z. So, the
negation of “7,000 is less than x” (7,000 < x) is “7,000 is not less than x”
(7,000 ≮ 𝑥). This means that either 7,000 is equal to x (7000 = x) or 7,000 is
more than x (7,000 > x) or simply 7,000 ≥ 𝑥. This is equivalent to x is at
most 7,000.

EXERCISES 2.1
Negate the following statements:
1. 100 is a multiple of 10.
2. x+y≤z
3. All trees are tall.
4. There are 12 months in a year.
5. Juan is at least 18 years old.

2.2 Negation of Compound Statements

To negate a conjunction or disjunction, we use the following equivalences:

1. ~ ( p ∧ q ) ⇔ ~p ∨ ~q
2. ~ ( p ∨ q ) ⇔ ~p ∧ ~q
The first equivalence was established using a truth table in Section 1.4 and the
proof of the second rule is left as an exercise.

Example 2.2 Negate the following statements:

1. The chairs are red and UP is at least 100 years old.
2. 1 + 1 < 5 or all roses are red.
3. Jose Rizal is both intelligent and nationalistic.

Page 11 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

Answers:
1. The chairs are NOT red or UP is less than 100 years old.
2. 1+1 ≥ 5 and not all roses are red.
3. Jose Rizal is not intelligent or he is not nationalistic.

EXERCISES 2.2 Negate the following statements:

1. The Philippines is an archipelago or cats are mammals.
2. 1 + 1 = 3 and 5 > 1.
3. I like watching movies and reading books.
4. p ∨ (r ∧q)
5. ( p ∨ q ) ∧ ( ~r ∨ ~s)

3 Negation of Statements with Quantifiers

We can also negate statements with the quantifiers all, some, none. Let us
consider the following statements with quantifiers and their negation.

Example 2.3 Negate the following statements:

1. p: All roses are red.
2. q: Some roses are red.
3. r : No roses are red.
Answers:
1. The negation of the statement “All roses are red. ” is simply
~ p: Not all roses are red.
This is also equivalent to
~ p : Some roses are not red.

2. Note that “Some roses are red” means there are roses which are red. The
negation is: there are no roses which are red, that is,
~ q: No roses are red.
This is NOT equivalent to “Some roses are not red.” If some roses are
red, this could also mean that some roses are not red. So the negation
should be none are red.
3. The negation of “No roses are red” is
~ p: Not all roses are red.
Page 12 of 36 July 2018
LOGIC AND REASONING

Exercises 2.3 Negate the following statements.

1. All cats are mammals.
2. Some of the islands are not inhabited.
3. No man is an island.
4. All UP students are honest or no politician is corrupt.
5. Some violets are blue and no roses are violet.

3 The Conditional
Everyday we have to make decisions, as simple as which route to take in going to
school. The decisions we make normally depend on some conditions or premises or
information given. For example, it it rains, then you will not walk going to school or
not go to class at all. We also encounter a lot of conditional statements or “if –
then’s” in advertisements, instructions, arguments, and ordinary conversations.
Hence, it is important to understand the conditional and the many forms it takes and
statements which are not equivalent to a given conditional.

3.1 Equivalent Forms for the Conditional

The conditional p → q or "If p then q" is equivalent to the following statements:

q if p. q is necessary for p.

p only if q. All p are q.

p is sufficient for q. Either not p or q.

Example 3.1 Consider the conditional

If it is a bird then it flies.
The premise is the statement
p: It is a bird.
The conclusion is the statement
q: It flies.
The conditional p → q is equivalent to
1. q if p:
It flies if it is a bird.

2. p only if q:
It is a bird only if it flies.

Page 13 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

3. p is sufficient for q:
Being a bird is sufficient for it to fly.

4. q is necessary for p.
Flying is necessary for it to be a bird.

5. All p are q. (This is referred to as a universal statement)

All birds fly.

6. Either not p or q.
Either is not a bird or it flies.

EXERCISES 3.1
1. Give five (5) equivalent statements for the following:
a) If you care for the environment, then you should recycle.
b) All animals are friendly.
c) No insect is useless.

2. Using the equivalent form “~p ∨ q” of the conditional, determine the

negations of p → q and verify this using a truth table.

3. State the negation of the statements in (1).

3.2 The Converse, Inverse, and Contrapositive

A common mistake in restating conditionals is interchanging the premise and the

conclusion. Consider the conditional
p → q : If it is a bird then it flies.
Which of the following statements is equivalent to p → q?
q → p : If it is a bird then it flies.
~p → ~q : If it is not a bird then it does not fly.
~q → ~p : If it does not fly then it is a bird.
The correct answer is ~q → ~p which is called the contrapositive of p → q. Let us
use a truth table to compare the truth values of p → q, q → p, ~p → ~q, and ~q →
~p .

p q p→q q→p ~p → ~q ~q → ~p

T T T T T T

T F F T T F

Page 14 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

F T T F F T

F F T T T T

Hence, we have the equivalent statements:

p → q ⇔ ~q → ~p
q → p ⇔ ~p → ~q

Definition : Given the conditional p → q, we call

1. ~p → ~q the contrapositive of p → ;
2. q → p the converse of p → q;
3. ~p → ~q the inverse of p → q.

Remark : From the above truth table, we have seen that the conditional is
equivalent to its contrapositive and not equivalent to its converse and inverse.

Example 3.2 : Consider the statement:

All even numbers are divisible by two.
Formulate the statement as a conditional and give its converse, inverse and
contrapositive.
Answer:
Conditional : If it is an even number, then i is divisible by two.
Converse : If a number is divisible by two, then it is an even number.
Inverse : If it is not an even number then it is not divisible by two.
Contrapositive: If it is not divisible by two, then it is not an even number.

EXERCISES 3.2
1. Which of the following statements is/are equivalent to
“All Filipinos are law-abiding.”
A. If you are a Filipino, then you are law-abiding.
B. If you are not a Filipino, then you are not law-abiding.
C. If you are not law-abiding, then you are not a Filipino.
D. If you are law-abiding, then you are a Filipino.
E. You are law-abiding if you are a Filipino.
F. You are law-abiding only if you are a Filipino.

Page 15 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

2. Which of the following statements is/are NOT equivalent to

“No gorilla is playful.”
A. If you are playful, then you are a gorilla.
B. If you are a gorilla, then you are not playful.
C. Either you are playful or you are a gorilla.
D. If you are not a gorilla, then you are playful
E. If you are playful then you are not a gorilla.
F. You are not playful only if you are a gorilla.
3. Give the contrapositive, inverse, and converse of the statements in Exercise
3.1.

4. ACTIVITY: Give five (5) examples of conditional statements coming from

advertisements (TV, radio, magazines or newspapers).

4 Valid and Invalid Arguments

Charles Dodgson, author of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and better known as
Lewis Caroll, was not only a famous writer. He was also a mathematician and
logician. He created numerous amusing puzzles with absurd implications and
nonsensical statements to train people on logical reasoning. The following are
puzzles by Lewis Carrol:

Puzzle 1: All babies are illogical.

Nobody is despised who can manage a crocodile.
Illogical persons are despised.

Puzzle 2: No kitten that loves fish is unteachable.

No kitten without a tail will play with a gorilla.
Kittens with whiskers always love fish.
No teachable kitten has green eyes.
No kittens have tails unless they have whiskers.

The objective in each puzzle is to draw a conclusion based on all the premises
given. Logical reasoning is important in puzzle and problem solving, as it provides a
systematic way to come up with a solution. We are also regularly inundated by
arguments or reasoning which may seem nonsensical or puzzling. We also
encounter phrases like : God is love. Love is blind. Therefore, God is blind. This
seems logical or valid, but is it? Hence, logical reasoning should be applied when
we discern the validity or soundness of arguments.

In this section, we discuss valid and invalid arguments, common forms or valid
arguments and some examples of fallacies we could encounter in everyday life.

Page 16 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

4.1 Euler Diagrams

An Euler diagram represents statements, the way Venn diagrams represent sets.
For example, consider the statement
p: Jose is a UP student.
The statement involves inclusion in a set, that is, Jose is an element of the set of UP
students. We can use a circle to represent the set of UP students and if we let x
represent Jose, the Euler diagram of statement p is given by :

UP students

We can also represent statements with the quantifiers all, some, and none.

Example 4.1 . Draw an Euler diagram for the following statements:

1. All cats are mammals.
2. Some dogs are hairy.
3. No even number is an odd number.
Answers:
1. All cats are mammals.
This statement involves two sets: set of cats and set of mammals,
represented by circles. Since all cats are mammals, this means the set of
cats is contained in the set of mammals. The diagram is given by:

mammals

cats

The conditional "If it is a cat then it is a mammal" is equivalent to "All cats

are mammals" so it is represented by the same diagram.

2. Some dogs are hairy.

This statement involves the set of dogs and the set of hairy things (which
may include animals). The quantifier "some" signifies that there may be
dogs which are not hairy and there may be hairy things which are not
Page 17 of 36 July 2018
LOGIC AND REASONING

dogs. This is represented by two intersecting sets and the region where
they intersect contains the set of dogs which are hairy.

dogs hairy
things

hairy dogs

Hairy dogs

3. No even number is an odd number.

We consider the sets of even numbers and odd numbers. The quantifier
"none" means the two sets must not intersect, otherwise, there will be
even numbers which are odd.

even odd
numbers numbers

In general, we have the following Euler diagrams for statements with quantifiers all,
some, or none involving members of two sets A and B:
All A are B. Some A are B.

A B

Page 18 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

No A is B.

A B

EXERCISES 4.1 Draw an Euler Diagram for the following statements:

1. Juan is a Math 10 student.
2. Maria is not a Filipino.
3. All actors are artists.
4. Some scientists are actors.
5. No professor is infallible.
6. Ducks are yellow.
7. If you are a Filipino, then you are honest.

4.2 Valid and Invalid Arguments

An argument consists of premises, say p1, p2, ..., pn, and a conclusion q and
consider the conjunction p1∧p2∧... ∧pn = p . The argument p→q is valid if the
premises are assumed to be true, then the conclusion must also hold true. That is,
the statement p→q is an implication. We can use Euler diagrams to determine the
validity of an argument. We construct a diagram which represents the premises.
The argument is valid if the conclusion is satisfied by the Euler diagram
representing all premises. Note that the premises are assumed to be true
although the statements may not be true in the strict sense.

Example 4.2. Consider the argument:

All dogs are hairy. Cotton is a dog. Therefore, Cotton is hairy.

To determine if it is valid, we draw an Euler diagram for the premises. The first
premise is represented by two sets, the set of dogs is inside the set of hairy things:

Page 19 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

hairy things

dogs

and the second premise, we have Cotton (represented by x) inside the set of dogs:

dogs

The premises, considered together, are represented by the following diagram:

\

hairy things

dogs
x

Since x is in the set of the smaller set (dogs), it follows that s is also in the set of
hairy things. This means the conclusion "Cotton is a dog" follows naturally from the
premises so the argument is valid.

To show an argument is invalid, it suffices to exhibit an Euler diagram satisfying all

the premises but not the given conclusion.

Example 4.3. Determine the validity of the argument

All dogs are hairy. My pet Cotton is hairy. Therefore, Cotton is a dog.
Answer:

The first premise is the same as the first premise in

Example 4.2 so the Euler Diagram is the same. On the
other hand, the second premise “Cotton is hairy” hairy things
represented by the diagram on the right (x represents
Cotton). x

Page 20 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

Observe that the diagram below satisfies the two premises:

hairy things

dogs

However, the conclusion “Cotton is a dog” is contradicted in the diagram. This

means that being hairy does not automatically imply being a dog. One may be hairy
without being a dog. Hence, the argument is INVALID.

Remark: One may also show that an argument is invalid by exhibiting two different
diagrams representing the premises. In the above example, we have the two
diagrams:

hairy things hairy things

dogs
dogs x
x

which both satisfy the two premises given but give two possible conclusions. In the
diagram on the left, Cotton (x) is a dog and also hairy, but in the second diagram,
Cotton is hairy but is not a dog. If an argument is valid, there should only be one
possible conclusion.

Let us look at more examples.

Example 4.4. Determine the validity of the following arguments:

1. All dogs are hairy. My pet Donut is not hairy. Therefore, Donut is not a
dog.
2. All cats are mammals. My pet Donut is not a cat. Therefore, Donut is not a
mammal.
3. All cats are mammals. All mammals are animals. Therefore, all cats are
animals.
4. All parrots are birds. Some birds are colorful. Therefore, some parrots are
colorful.
Page 21 of 36 July 2018
LOGIC AND REASONING

5. All parrots are birds. Some parrots fly. Therefore, some birds fly.
6. All parrots are birds. All cats are mammals. No bird is a mammal.
Therefore, no parrot is a cat.

Solutions:
1. This argument is VALID. The two premises are represented by the
following diagram, with D representing Donut.

hairy things D

dogs

Since Donut is not in the set of hairy things, it follows that Donut is also
not in the set of dogs. Therefore, the conclusion is implied by the
premises.

Take note that the premise given “All dogs are hairy” is not really a true
statement since some dogs are not hairy, but we evaluate the validity of
the argument and NOT the truth value of the conclusion.
2. The argument is INVALID. Although Donut is not a cat, it does not
automatically follow that Donut is not a mammal. This can be illustrated
with a diagram:

mammals

cats D

which satisfies both premises but not the conclusion.

3. The two premises are represented by:

All cats are mammals. All mammals are animals.

animals
mammals
Page 22 of 36 July 2018
mammals
cats
LOGIC AND REASONING

The Euler diagram representing both premises is given by:

A
A - animals
M
M - mammals
C
C - cats

The diagram shows that any element of the set of cats is automatically an
element of the set of animals. Hence, the argument is VALID.

4. We have the two Euler diagrams for each premise

All parrots (P) are birds (B). Some birds (B) are colorful (C).

B
B C
P

If both premises are considered, we have the Euler diagram

P C

which satisfies the two premises but not the conclusion. That is, it does
not follow that some parrots fly. Hence, the argument is invalid.

5. The following diagram represents the two premises:

All parrots (P) are birds (B). Some parrots (P) fly (F).

Page 23 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

P F

Since (F) intersects (P), it automatically intersects (B). That is, the parrots
which fly are the birds which fly. Hence, the argument is valid.

6. The premises are represented by the diagram

All parrots are birds. All cats are mammals. No bird is a mammal.
Therefore, no parrot is a cat.

All parrots (P) are birds (B). All cats (C) are mammals (M).

B M

P C

The diagrams, taken together, satisfy the third premise as well, that no
bird is a mammal. As can be seen, the conclusion that no parrot is a cat
follows from the three premises. Therefore, the argument is valid.

Remark: As mentioned in the first example, the argument may be valid even if the
premises are not universally true. That is, the argument is valid but not “sound”. In
fact, we can have premises that may be meaningless, but the conclusion (which is
also meaningless) can still follow logically if the premises are assumed to be true.
Let us consider the following argument:

Example 4.5. All booms (B) are zooms (Z). All feeps (F) are meeps (M). No zoom is
a meep. Therefore, no boom is a feep.

The argument is valid. We have following diagram representing the premises:

Z M

Page 24 of 36 July 2018

B F
LOGIC AND REASONING

Note that since no zeep is a meep, this will ensure that no boom is a feep. This
argument is actually in the same form as the argument given in Example 6 above.

EXERCISES 4.2
1. Determine if the following arguments are valid or invalid. Justify your answers
by drawing a diagram.
a. All Filipinos enjoy singing. Juan is a Filipino. Therefore, Juan enjoys
singing.
b. Some physicists are poets. Einstein is a physicist. Therefore,
Einstein is a poet.
c. All lions are animals. Some lions have manes. Therefore, some
animals have manes.
d. All parrots are birds. Some birds are colorful. Therefore, some parrots
are colorful.
e. All booms (B) are zooms (Z). All feeps (F) are meeps (M). No boom is
a feep. Therefore, no zoom is a meep.
2. Consider the following premises : Every sane person can do logic. No cat
can do logic. Those who are not sane cannot serve in the government.
Which of the following is not a valid conclusion?
a) Cats cannot serve in the government.
b) No cat is sane.
c) Logical persons cannot serve in the government.
d) Those who serve in the government are not logical.
3. Consider the following premises: All physicists are scientists. Some scientists
are artists. All mathematicians are artists. Some physicists are
mathematicians. No scientist is illogical. Which is a valid conclusion?
a) No physicist is illogical.
b) Some mathematicians are illogical.
c) Some physicists are artists.
4. Find a valid conclusion for the following Lewis Carrol puzzles (HINT: Express
the given statements in conditional form):
a. Babies are illogical. Nobody is despised who can manage a crocodile.
Illogical persons are despised.

Page 25 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

b. No ducks waltz.
No officers ever decline to waltz.
All my poultry are ducks.
c. No kitten that loves fish is unteachable.

No kitten without a tail will play with a gorilla.

Kittens with whiskers always love fish.
No teachable kitten has green eyes.
No kittens have tails unless they have whiskers.

4.3 Valid Argument Forms

Let us look at the valid arguments given in previous examples:
1. All dogs are hairy. Cotton is a dog. Therefore, Cotton is hairy.
2. All dogs are hairy. My pet Donut is not hairy. Therefore, Donut is not a dog.
3. All cats are mammals. All mammals are animals. Therefore, all cats are
animals.
Arguments of the above form are always valid and satisfy valid argument forms
called modus ponens, modus tollens, and syllogism, respectively.

To define the form of these arguments, recall that the conditional p → q is

equivalent to the universal statement “All p are q.” So we have can restate the
above as

All p are q. p→q

All dogs are hairy. If it is a dog, then it is hairy.

All cats are mammals. If it is a cat, then it is a mammal.

All mammals are animals If it is a mammal, then it is an animal.

We have the following general forms:

Modus ponens

If it is a dog then it is hairy. p→q

Page 26 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

Cotton is a dog. p

Therefore, Cotton is hairy Therefore q

Modus tollens

If it is a dog then it is hairy. p→q

My pet Donut is not hairy. ~q

Therefore, Cotton is a dog. Therefore ~p

Syllogism

If it is a cat, then it is a mammal. p→q

If it is a mammal then it is an animal. q→r

Therefore, if it is a cat, then it is an Therefore p → r

animal.

We can use truth tables to show the validity of these arguments. In particular, we
find the truth value of the conditional whose premise is the conjunction of the
premises and the conclusion is the given conclusion in the argument, that is,
1. (Modus ponens) [(p →q) ∧ p] → q

2. (Modus tollens) [(p → q) ∧ ~q] → ~p.

3. (Syllogism) [(p →q) ∧ (q → r) ] → (p → r)

If the statement is true for each of the four cases in the truth table, then the
argument is valid. In this case, we call the statement a tautology and the
conditionals given are in fact, implications. We have the following truth tables:

1. Modus ponens

p q p→q (p → q ) ∧ p [(p →q) ∧ p] → q

Page 27 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T F T

F F T F T

2. Modus Tollens

p q p→q (p → q) ∧ ~ q [(p → q) ∧ ~q] → ~ p

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T F T

F F T F T

3. Syllogism (Note we have three statements p, q, r.)

(p → q) ∧ [(p → q) ∧ (q→r)]
p q r p→q q→r p→r
(q→r) → (p→r)

T T T T T T T T

T T F T F F F T

T F T F T F T T

T F F F T F F T

F T T T T T T T

F T F T F F T T

F F T F T F T T

F F F F T F T T

Example 4.6. Verify that the following arguments are valid and determine if they
are of the given valid argument forms (modus ponens, modus tollens, or syllogism).

Page 28 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

1. All UP students need to enroll in Math 10. Maria is a UP student. Therefore,

Maria has enroll in Math 10.

2. If I sing, then it rains. It is not raining. Therefore, I did not sing.

3. If you love cats, then you love animals. If you love animals, then you should
be kind to animals. Therefore, if you love cats, you should be kind to animals.

Answers: The given arguments are valid and this can be shown using Euler
Diagrams (left as an exercise). Arguments 1, 2, 3 are examples of a modus ponens,
modus tollens, and syllogism, respectively.

EXERCISES 4.3

1. Verify that the following arguments are valid and classify according to the
type of valid argument form.

a) If it rains, I will sleep. I did not sleep. Therefore, it did not rain.

b) If it’s a reptile, then it’s cold-blooded. Barney is not cold-blooded.

Therefore, Barney is not a reptile.

c) ~All scientists are hardworking. If you are hardworking, then you

contribute to our country’s economic growth. Therefore, all scientists
contribute to our country’s economic growth.

2. Using Euler Diagrams, establish the validity of the modus pones, modus
tollens and syllogism.

4.4 Fallacies

Consider the two invalid arguments previously discussed:

1. All dogs are hairy. My pet Cotton is hairy. Therefore, Cotton is a dog.
2. All cats are mammals. My pet Donut is not a cat. Therefore, Donut is not a
mammal.

These are examples of two invalid argument forms, the fallacy of the converse and
the fallacy of the inverse, respectively. In symbols, these are of the form:

Fallacy of the Converse Fallacy of the Inverse

p→q p→q

Page 29 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

q ~p

Therefore p Therefore ~ q

Let us look at the truth tables for these two arguments. We consider the two
conditionals {[(p → q) ∧ q] → p} and { [(p → q) ∧ ~p] → ~q}.

1. (Fallacy of the Converse) [(p → q) ∧ q] → p

p q p→q (p → q ) ∧ q [(p →q) ∧ q] → p

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T T F

F F T F T

2. (Fallacy of the Inverse) [(p → q) ∧ ~p] → ~q

p q p→q (p → q) ∧ ~p [(p → q) ∧ ~p] → ~q

T T T F T

T F F F T

F T T T F

F F T F T

Observe that unlike the valid argument forms, the arguments given above are not
tautologies since they are not true for each of the four cases. They are called
fallacies. The argument {[(p →q) ∧ q] → p} is false when p is true and q is false,
and {[(p → q) ∧ ~p] → ~q} is false when p is false and q is true.

Example 4.6. Verify that the following arguments are invalid and determine
whether the argument is an example of the fallacy of the converse or the fallacy of
the inverse.
1. If you can add, then you can subtract. You cannot add. Therefore, you cannot
subtract.

Page 30 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

2. All UP students are diligent. Maria is diligent. Therefore, Maria is a UP

student.

3. If I sing, then it rains. If it does not rain, then birds sing. Birds are not singing.
Therefore, I am singing.

Answers: The above statements can be shown to be invalid using Euler diagrams.
Arguments 1 and 3 are fallacies of the converse while argument 1 is an example of
a fallacy of the inverse. In argument 3, the premise “Birds are not singing” implies
that it is raining (by the contrapositive of the second premise). If it rains, no
conclusion may be drawn since the given premise is “If I sing, then it rains.”

Other fallacies

We also have fallacies other than the forms given above. In fact, we probably
encounter these fallacies more frequently:
1. Ad Hominem. The argument is based on the character of the opponent
instead of the argument itself. This may also involve insulting the opponent
to make opponent’s argument seem false.
Example: Maria wears leather shoes, so she cannot be a vegetarian.

2. Ad Populum. This fallacy occurs when an argument is assumed to be valid

since many people believe in it.
Example: Surveys indicate that 55% of the population believe that use of
contraceptives is dangerous. Therefore, contraceptives should be banned.

3. Appeal to Authority. The argument is claimed to be valid because a

famous or famous person, who is not an expert in the pertinent field, supports
it.
Example: Brand X is the best toothpaste since our president uses it.

4. False Cause. This fallacious argument correlates two events, even if

unrelated.
Example: Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down. Therefore my going
to sleep causes the sun to set.

5. Hasty Generalization. In this fallacy, a generalization is made based on a

few examples supporting the claim.
Example: I don’t excel in tennis. I also don’t excel in volleyball. Therefore, I
don’t excel in sports.

Exercises 4.4
1. Verify that the following arguments are invalid and determine whether the
argument is an example of the fallacy of the converse or the fallacy of the

Page 31 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

inverse:
a. All birds have feathers. I am not a bird. Therefore, I have no feathers.
b. If you are smart, then you are successful. You are successful.
Therefore you are smart.

2. Give your own example of the fallacies discussed.

3. Give at least three (3) other fallacies aside from the forms discussed in this
section and give an example for each. You may refer to these sources:

a. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RyVj2FPGyg
b. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDGp04CfM4M
c. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
d. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/mario-livio/logical-
fallacies_b_1932906.html

4. ACTIVITY : Give five (5) examples of fallacies found in advertisements or

newspaper/magazine articles and explain why these are fallacies and how
they are used to mislead.

4 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Problem solving is done not only in formal mathematics courses or limited to
mathematicians and scientists. Almost any profession or discipline requires problem
solving. In addition, if you love solving sudoku puzzles, rubiks cube, logic, or
pattern problems, these recreational activities are also forms of problem solving
which basically involves finding a conclusion or answer from known facts. Correct
reasoning is important when we solve problems We discuss here two processes of
reasoning, deductive and inductive, and use these to solve some problems.

Deductive reasoning (or logical deduction) is the process of reasoning from a

general statement to a specific instance. We have seen this in the valid argument
forms given in the previous sections. The classic example of a deductive argument:
All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
is the primary form of deductive reasoning, which is the valid argument form
modus ponens. The statement “ All men are mortal” is a general statement and the
conclusion is deduced from this and the specific instance that Socrates is a man.
The modus tollens and syllogism are also forms of deductive reasoning.

Inductive reasoning is the process of reasoning from specific instances to a

general statement.
The following is an example of an inductive argument:

Page 32 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

2 is an even number. 12 is an even number. 22 is an even number.

Therefore, all numbers ending in 2 are even.
Although the conclusion drawn in this example is true, this is not always the case
when inductive reasoning is employed.

Look at numbers of the form 2p- 1, where p is a prime number (p = 2, 5, 7, …). We

have
22 - 1 = 4 – 1 = 3
23 - 1 = 8 – 1 = 7
25 - 1 = 32 – 1 = 31
Note that 3, 7, 31 are prime numbers. By inductive reasoning, we can conclude that
2p- 1 is a prime number when p is a prime number. However, this is false. The
number 211- 1 = 2048 – 1 = 2047 is not prime since it is the product of 23 and 89.

(Trivia: Prime numbers which can be expressed in the form 2p- 1 where p is a prime
number are called Mersenne primes, named after the French scholar Marin
Mersenne who took interest in prime numbers of this form. The search for Mersenne
primes continues and the largest known as of December 2017 is 277,232,917 – 1.)

Hence, When a general statement is concluded from specific examples using

inductive reasoning, this still has to be formally established or proved using kown
facts, in which case, deductive reasoning is necessary.

Exercises 5.1
1. Determine whether the following arguments use inductive or deductive
reasoning.

a. All Filipinos are nationalistic. Jose Rizal is a Filipino. Hence, Jose

Rizal is nationalistic.

b. Math 10 is easy. Math 20 is easy. Therefore, all math courses are

easy.

c. In a mystery case, it is known that Jose did it or Maria did it. Maria did
not do it. Therefore, Jose did it.

d. Ducks do not waltz. I can waltz. Therefore, I am not a duck.

2. Activity: Circles and Chords. Given a circle, if you mark n points on the
circle, what is the maximum number of chords (a chord is line joining two
points on a circle) that can be drawn? What is the maximum number of
regions formed? Investigate the case for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Can you

Page 33 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

generalize the results? Let us illustrate, for n = 2, 3 and do the case for 1, 4,
5, 6

Number of points (marked x) Max. no. of Max. no. of

chords regions

n=2
x
1 2
x

n=3
x x
3 4

Example 5.1. Place the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 in the circles in the figure below,
such that each side totals 12.

Solution: The problem involves writing the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 such that if you
add the numbers on one side of the triangle formed by the singles, the sum should
be 12. This is a problem where guess and test may be employed. However, if you
just guess and write the numbers randomly, solving it might take some time until you
“guess” the correct solution. Since the sum is 12, you cannot place the smaller
numbers 1, 2, 3 on the same side. Moreover, to get a sum of 12, you will need
exactly two of the higher numbers 4, 5, 6, but not all three, on one side. Hence, 4,
5, 6 will be on the vertices of the triangle and 1, 2, 3 may now be placed in the
appropriate circles. The solution is

. 4

3 2

Page 34 of 36 July 2018

LOGIC AND REASONING

5 1 6

Example 5.2. Find the next number in the sequence 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, ?.

Solution: This problem, and in general, finding the next number in a sequence,
involves pattern finding. In this case, you could have observed that 1 + 1 = 2, 1 + 2
= 3, 2 + 3 = 5, 3 + 5 = 8. So the next number is obtained by adding the two previous
numbers. So the answer is 13. This sequence is called the Fibonacci sequence.

Exercises 5.2
Solve the following problems and explain how you arrived at your solution using
Polya’s process.
1. Find the next two (2) numbers, x and y, in the given sequences:
a. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, x, y
b. 3, 9, 15, 21, 27, x, y
c. 3, 15, 75, x, y
d. 1, 6, 15, 28, 45, x, y
e. 2, 6, 22, 56, 114, x, y

2. Three school children Junie, Glory, and Mickey are sitting side by side. Junie
always tells the truth, Glory sometimes tells the truth and Mickey never tells
the truth. The child on the left says “Junie is in the middle”. The child in the
middle says “I’m Glory”, and the child on the right says “Mickey is in the
middle”. Determine the seating arrangement of the three.

3. In a certain jungle, there are three tribes: Tribe T, Tribe L, Tribe X. Members
of Tribe T always tell the truth, Tribe L members never tell the truth and Tribe
X members sometimes tell the truth and they sometimes lie. If you meet one
tribe member and he tells you, “I always lie,” which tribe does he come
from? If you meet another tribe member and he says, “I sometime lie,”
which tribe can he come from?

4. Jose must take a cat, a mouse, and a sack of rice across a river with his
boat. The boat to be used can only accommodate Juan and either the cat,
mouse or the sack of rice. However, if left together, the cat will eat the
mouse. Also, if the mouse is left alone with the rice, it will eat the rice. The
cat does not eat rice. The mouse and rice are safe when Jose is present.
What is the minimum number of times Jose needs to cross the river so he
could get everything across?

5. Four children, Amy, Susie, Tessie, and Eddie are lined up according to
height, each holding a balloon. The child in front (the shortest) is holding
Page 35 of 36 July 2018
LOGIC AND REASONING

neither a red nor blue balloon. Susie is holding a red balloon. Tessie sees
exactly two balloons in front of her. The child holding the blue balloon is right
in front of the child with the yellow balloon. Amy is in front of Tessie. One
child is holding a white balloon. Determine the arrangement of the four
children (from shortest to tallest) and the color of the balloon they are holding.

References:
1. Mathematical Ideas, C.D. Miller, V. Heeren, J. Hornsby, C. Heeren, Pearson,
2015.

2. Mathematics in Life, Society, and the World, H. Parks, G. Musser, R.

Burton,Hornsby W. Siebler, Prentice Hall, 1977.

3. Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, H.R. Jacobs, W.H. Freeman and Co.,

1977.

4. An Introduction to Mathematical Reasoning, P. Eccles, Cambridge University

Press, 1998.

5. Sources from the web:

a. https://owlcation.com/humanities/Logical-Fallacies-Logical-Fallacies-
and-How-They-Are-Used

b. http://www.math.hawaii.edu/~hile/math100/logice.htm

c. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/mario-livio/logical-
fallacies_b_1932906.html

d. http://www.fallacydetective.com/articles/categoriescategory/fallacies/

Page 36 of 36 July 2018