4.

4 Valid and Invalid Arguments

An argument in mathematics and logic is not a dispute. It is a set of statements ending in a
conclusion. In this section we show how to verify the validity or non-validity of an argument.

Valid and Invalid Argument

An argument is a sequence of statements called the premises (or assumptions or hypotheses) and a
final statement called the conclusion. To say that an argument form is valid means that if the
premises are all true, then the conclusion is also true. An argument is invalid if it is not a valid
argument.

Consider the following example.

If Socrates is a man, then he is mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
This argument has two premises namely, “If Socrates is a man, then he is mortal” and “Socrates is a
man”. The conclusion of this argument is, “Socrates is mortal”. It can also be written in the following
form:
If Socrates is a man, then he is mortal.
Socrates is a man. .
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

Writing the argument in symbolic form is particularly useful in determining whether an argument is valid.
The example above has a symbolic form
𝒑→𝒒
𝒑 .
∴𝒒

The symbol ∴, which is read “therefore,” is normally placed just before the conclusion.

Example 1
Write the following arguments in symbolic form.
a. If logic is easy, then I am a monkey’s uncle. I am not a monkey’s uncle. Therefore, logic is not easy.
b. If this number is larger than 2, then its square is larger than 4. This number is not larger than 2.
Therefore, the square of this number is not larger than 4.

Solution 2
a. Let 𝒆 be “logic is easy” and 𝒎 be “I am a monkey’s uncle”. The argument in symbolic form is
𝒆→𝒎
~𝒎____
∴ ~𝒆
b is left as exercise.
Determining Validity or Invalidity of an Argument
Procedure to Determine the Validity of an Argument
1. Write the argument in symbolic form and identify the premises and
conclusion.
2. Construct a truth table showing the truth values of all the premises and
the conclusion.
3. A row of the truth table in which all the premises are true is called a
critical row. If there is a critical row in which the conclusion is false, the
argument is invalid. If the conclusion in every critical row is true, then
the argument is valid.
Example 2
Determine whether the argument in Example 1.a is valid or not.

Solution 2
The argument in symbolic form is given by 𝒆→𝒎.
~𝒎____
∴ ~𝒆
We construct the truth table as follows:

𝒆 𝒎 𝒆→𝒎 ~𝒎 ~𝒆
T T T F
T F F T
F T T F
F F T T T

Observe that there is only one critical row and on that critical row the conclusion is true. Therefore, the
argument is valid.

Example 3
Determine whether the argument is valid or not.
𝒑→𝒓
𝒓______
∴𝒑
Solution 4

𝒑 𝒓 𝒑→𝒓 𝒓 𝒑
T T T T T
T F F F
F T T T T
F F T T F

Because the conclusion is false in one of the critical rows, the argument is invalid.

Seatwork 1

Use a truth table to determine whether the argument is valid or not.

𝒓 → ~𝒈
~𝒓______
∴𝒈
Solution for Seatwork 1

Valid Argument Forms

Arguments can be shown to be valid if they have the same symbolic form as an argument that is
known to be valid. Following are some standard forms (also known as rules of inference) for valid
arguments.

1. Modus Ponens or Direct Reasoning

The most famous form of syllogism in logic that is known to be valid is called modus ponens. It has
the following form: 𝒑→𝒒
𝒑_____
∴𝒒
2. Modus Tollens or Contrapositive Reasoning
Another form of syllogism and a valid argument form is called modus tollens. It has the following
form: 𝒑→𝒒
~𝒒_____
∴ ~𝒑
3. Generalization
These argument forms are used for making generalizations.
a. 𝒑 __ b. 𝒒 __
∴𝒑∨𝒒 ∴𝒑∨𝒒

4. Specialization
These argument forms are used for specializing.
a. 𝒑 ∧ 𝒒 b. 𝒑 ∧ 𝒒
∴𝒑 ∴𝒒

5. Elimination
These argument forms say that when you have only two possibilities and you can rule one out, the
other must be the case.
a. 𝒑 ∨ 𝒒 b. 𝒑 ∨ 𝒒
~𝒒___ ~𝒑___
∴𝒑 ∴𝒒

6. Transitivity
 If an argument is a chain of if-then statements, we can conclude that the first statement implies the
last.
𝒑→𝒒
𝒒 → 𝒓__
∴𝒑→𝒓

Example 4
Use the argument forms to determine whether the following arguments are valid or invalid.
a. If my glasses are on the kitchen table (𝒌), then I saw them at breakfast (𝒔). I did not see my glasses at
breakfast. Therefore, my glasses are not on the kitchen table.
b. 𝒎 → ~𝒏
𝒎_______
∴ ~𝒏
c. 𝒉 ∨ 𝒋
~𝒉___
∴𝒋
d. If the price of gold rises (𝒈), the stock market will fall (𝒔). If the stock market will fall (𝒔), I’m not
investing in the stock market (~𝒊). Therefore, if the price of gold rises, I’m not investing in the stock
market.
e. Abraham Riemann is a mathematician (𝒎) and an engineer (𝒆). Therefore, Abraham Riemann is an
engineer.

Solution 4
a. The argument in symbolic form is 𝒌→𝒔
~𝒔____
∴ ~𝒌
This is similar to the standard form known as modus tollens or contrapositive. Therefore the argument
is valid.

b, c, d and e are left as exercise.

Standard Forms of Two Invalid Arguments

Any argument that has one of these symbolic forms is invalid.
1. Fallacy of the converse
𝒑→𝒒
𝒒_____
∴𝒑
2. Fallacy of the Inverse
𝒑→𝒒
~𝒑___
∴ ~𝒒

Example 5
Determine whether the following arguments are valid or invalid.
a. If you can read this book (𝒓), you can go to college (𝒄). You cannot read the book. Therefore, you
cannot go to college.
b. If it’s difficult to obtain (𝒅), it can last long (𝒍). It can last long. Therefore, it’s difficult to obtain.

Solution 5
a. This argument in symbolic form is 𝒓→𝒄
~𝒓___
∴ ~𝒄
This is an invalid argument due to fallacy of the inverse.

b is left as exercise.

Quantifiers
The method and the analysis we used so far in determining the validity of an argument casts light on
many aspects of human reasoning, but it cannot be used to determine validity in the majority of everyday
and mathematical situations. For example, the argument

All men are mortal.

Socrates is a man.
∴ Socrates is mortal.
is naturally perceived as correct. Yet its validity cannot be derived using the methods we discussed above
as the statements in the arguments are not in the forms that we are familiar with. Such statements use
quantifiers and are considered as quantified statements.

There are two types of quantifiers, the existential quantifiers and the universal quantifiers. The
phrases for some, there exists, and at least one are called existential quantifiers. They are used to assert
that every element of a given set satisfies some condition. The words none, all, and every, are called
universal quantifiers. The quantifiers none and no deny the existence of something, while the quantifiers
all and every assert that every element in a given set satisfies a particular condition.

Negation of Quantified Statements

Consider the false statement “No mathematicians are good-looking”. Many people would say that
the negation is “All mathematicians are good-looking”. But this statement is also false because we can
find at least one mathematician who is not good-looking. The table below shows how to write the
negation of statements in quantified form.
Statement Negation
All 𝑿 are 𝒀. Some 𝑿 are not 𝒀.
No 𝑿 are 𝒀. Some 𝑿 are 𝒀.
Some 𝑿 are 𝒀. No 𝑿 are 𝒀.
Some 𝑿 are not 𝒀. All 𝑿 are 𝒀.
Example 6
Write the negation of the following statements.
a. No Mathematicians are good-looking.
b. All prime numbers are odd.
c. Some students love mathematics.
d. None of my friends remembered my birthday.
e. Everybody enjoyed the sermon last Sabbath.

Solution 6
a. Some mathematicians are good-looking.
b. No students love mathematics.

c, d and e are left as exercise.

Arguments Involving Quantifiers

The diagrams below show the possible relationships that can exist between two sets. It involves using the
diagrams known as Euler Diagrams. We use this to determine validity or invalidity of arguments
involving quantifiers.

All 𝑿 are 𝒀. No 𝑿 are 𝒀. Some 𝑿 are 𝒀. Some 𝑿 are not 𝒀.

Example 7
Determine whether the argument is valid or invalid using the Euler diagram.
All mathematicians are logician.
Ethan is a mathematician._________
∴ Ethan is a logician.

Solution 7

logicians

mathematicians

The diagram shows any mathematician must also be a logician. Therefore, if Ethan is mathematician, then
he must be a logician.
Example 8
Determine whether the argument is valid or invalid using the Euler diagram.
No prime numbers are negative.
The number 𝒏 is not negative._________
∴ The number 𝒏 is a prime number.

Solution 8
Prime numbers Negative numbers Prime numbers Negative numbers

𝑛
𝑛

The first premise in the argument is represented by two disjoint sets. It means that the set of prime
numbers and the set of negative numbers have no common element. The second premise can be
interpreted in two ways: 𝒏 is prime or 𝒏 is neither prime nor negative. This means that the conclusion in
the argument is not always true. Thus, the argument is invalid.

Seatwork 8
Use Euler diagram to determine whether the argument is valid or not.

Some A students sit in the front row.

All those who sit in the front row are attractive.
∴ Some A students are attractive.

Solution for Seatwork 8