Truth Tables

The aim of this tutorial is to help

you learn to construct truth tables
and use them to test the validity of
arguments.

Go To Next Slide
Truth tables often seem complex and difficult. This
initial perception, however, is misleading. By
following a consistent, step-by-step process,
constructing truth tables will soon become second
nature. The practice it does take to gain this skill is
worth the effort for at least two reasons.

1. Truth tables are powerful and let you test the

validity of arguments with certainty.
2. The skills involved in constructing truth tables
are foundational for more sophisticated sorts
of symbolic logic.

Go To Next Slide
 Before we begin it is important to take a minute to
think about what truth tables are and what their
purpose is. Like Venn Diagrams, truth tables are a way
of representing an argument symbolically for the
purpose of determining the argument’s validity or
invalidity.
Validity, we recall, refers to a deductive argument
whose true premises guarantee the truth of its
conclusion. On the contrary, an invalid argument is one
where the truth of the premises do not guarantee the
truth of the conclusion.
Truth tables, then, offer a systematic way to
investigate these relationships and determine validity or
invalidity.
Go To Next Slide
First things first. As with Venn Diagrams, truth tables
require an argument to be translated into a form using
claim variables for the claims.
Each claim variable stands for a complete sentence.
Each claim variable has a truth value; that is, it is
either true or false.

P
This is a truth table. As you can see it shows
T
the possible truth values of the claim “P.”
F

Go To Next Slide
Next, realize that whatever truth value a claim has,
its negation (contradictory claim) has the opposite
truth value.
We use the “~” to represent the negation
and pronounce this truth function
P ~P symbol as “not.”
T F
This truth table is the definition of
F T negation. So, if “P” is true then “not
P” is false and if “P” is false then “not
P” is true.

Go To Next Slide
Let’s look at the remaining truth function symbols.
They each represent the relationship between two
claims.

A conjunction is a compound claim asserting both of

the simpler claims contained in it. A conjunction is
true if and only if both of the simpler claims are true.

P&Q This is a conjunction using the ”&”

symbol. It is pronounced “P and Q.”

Go To Next Slide
So, what would a truth table for a conjunction look
like? Remember it must show all the possible
combinations of truth values of its claims.
This table must contain 4 lines because it needs to show
all possible combinations of truth values of “P” and “Q.”

P Q P&Q
“P” True and “Q” True T T ?
“P” True and “Q” False T F ?
“P” False and “Q” True F T ?
“P” False and “Q” False F F ?

Go To Next Slide
Now, look at the third column. The lines below “P
and Q” show the truth values of this conjunction
based on the truth values of its parts. Since a
conjunction is only true when both its parts are true
we can see how the lines are assigned values.

Study this table carefully. Make

P Q P&Q
sure you understand what the
T T T purpose of each part is and what
T F F it tells you. It is essential that you
F T F understand these basics in order
F F F to use truth tables to test validity.

Go To Next Slide
A disjunction is a compound claim asserting either or
both of the simpler claims contained in it. A
disjunction is false if and only if both of the simpler
claims are false.
PvQ This is a disjunction using the ”v”
symbol. It is pronounced “P or Q.”

P Q PvQ This truth table represents the

T T T rule of disjunction. As you can
T F T see, the only way “P or Q” is false
F T T is the case where both “P” is false
F F F and “Q” is false.

Go To Next Slide
A conditional is a compound claim asserting the second
simpler claim on the condition that the first is true. A
conditional is false if and only if the first claim is true
and the second false.
PQ This is a conditional using the ”” symbol.
It is pronounced “if P then Q.”

P Q PQ This truth table represents the

T T T conditional. As you can see, the
T F F only way “ if P then Q” is false is
F T T the case where “P” is true and
F F T “Q” is false.

Go To Next Slide
We are now ready to look at truth table themselves.
When constructing truth tables, keep the following
three rules in mind:
1. Use parentheses, as in algebra, to represent where
the truth function operation is doing its work.

2. The table must capture all possible combinations of

truth values for individual sentences contained in the
complex expression.
3. The table must contain columns for the parts of the
final complex expression, if any of those parts is not a
single claim variable.

Go To Next Slide
Now, use a truth table to determine the validity or
invalidity of this argument:
“If building the bookshelf requires a screw driver then
I will not be able to build it. After reading the
directions I see that a screw driver is needed. So, I
can’t build it.”

If S then not B
First, translate this argument
S _
into standard form
Not B

S  ~B
Now into symbols
S _
~B
Go To Next Slide
 S  ~B Now, build a truth table. We have two
S _ claim variables, “S” and “~B” which will
~B each need a column.

Next, we need a column for each premise and the

conclusion. The second premise is already represented,
so we only need to add the first premise to our table.

S ~B S  ~B ~B
T T
T F
F T
F F

Go To Next Slide
 S  ~B Now, fill in the truth values for the first
S _ premise based on the rule of the
~B conditional.
For convenience we can add columns for the second
premise and the conclusion, though they are already in the
table.
S ~B S  ~B S ~B
T We’re done. Our truth table
T T T T
F now tells us whether or not
T F T F
T the argument is valid. What
F T F T
T do you think?
F F F F

Go To Next Slide
 S  ~B To use the table to test the validity of our
S _ argument, we need to concentrate on the
~B definition of validity. An argument is
valid if it is impossible for the premises to
be true and the conclusion
S ~B S  ~B S ~B to be false. Since our truth
T T T T T
table represents all possible
T F F T F
combinations of the truth
F T T F T
values of the parts of the
F F T F F
argument, we simply need
to inspect it to see if any line shows true premises and a
false conclusion. As you can see there are no such lines,
so this is a valid argument. When the premises are true
so is the conclusion.
Go To Next Slide
Now, use a truth table to determine the validity or
invalidity of this argument:
“Martin is not buying a new car since he said he would
buy a new car or take a Hawaiian vacation and I just
heard him talking about his trip to Maui.

C or H
First, translate this argument
H _
into standard form
Not C
CvH
Now into symbols
H _
~C

Go To Next Slide
 CvH Now, build a truth table. We have two
H _ claim variables, “C” and “H” which will
~C each need a column.

Next, we need a column for each premise and the

conclusion. The second premise is already represented,
so we only need to add the first premise to our table.

C H CvH ~C
T T
T F
F T
F F

Go To Next Slide
 CvH Now, fill in the truth values for the first
H _ premise based on the rule of disjunction.
~C For convenience we can add columns for the
second premise, though it is already in the table. We merely
recopy the “H” column and determine the truth values of the
conclusion “~ C” column by negating the “C.”

C H CvH H ~C
T We’re done. Our truth table
T T T F
T now tells us whether or not
T F F F
T the argument is valid. What
F T T T
F do you think?
F F F T

Go To Next Slide
 CvH C H CvH H ~C
T T T T F
H _
T F T F F
~C
F T T T T
F F F F T

When you inspect the truth table you want to see if it is

possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
false.
Note the red shaded line. It is possible for the premises
to be true and the conclusion false. This is an invalid
argument.

Go To Next Slide
 Now, use a truth table to determine the validity or
invalidity of this argument:
“If you want to over-clock your processor you must make both
hardware and software changes. Unfortunately, you are either
ignorant of hardware or software. So, you won’t be over-
clocking your processor
If O then H and S
First, translate this argument
Not H or Not S _
into standard form
Not O
O  (H & S)
Now into symbols
~H v ~S _
~O

Go To Next Slide
 O  (H & S) Now, build a truth table. We have three
~H v ~S _ claim variables: “O,” “H,” and “S,”
~O which will each need a column. With
three variables we will need 8 lines to show all possible
truth value combinations. Note the the “S” column
alternates one true and one false all the way
O H S
down, the “H” line alternates pairs of trues
T T T
and falses and the “O” line alternates four
T T F
trues with four falses. If we had another
T F T
column it would alternate eight trues with
T F F
eight falses.
F T T
F T F Now add columns for the premises.
F F T
F F F
Go To Next Slide
O  (H & S) We need columns for “~H” and
~H v ~S _ “~S”.We get these truth values
~O by negating “H” and “S”.

O H S ~H ~S H&S Next we add a column for

T T T F F T “H & S” by applying the
T T F F T F rule of conjunction to the
T F T T F F “H” and “S” truth values
T F F T T F we have already drawn.
F T T F F T
F T F F T F
F F T T F F Go To Next Slide
F F F T T F
O  (H & S) Now add a column for the first
~H v ~S _ premise by applying the rule of the
~O conditional to the “O” and “H&S”
values in the table.
O H S ~H ~S H&S O  (H&S)
T T T F F T T
T T F F T F F
T F T T F F F
T F F T T F F
Go To
F T T F F T T
Next Slide
F T F F T F T
F F T T F F T
F F F T T F T
O  (H & S) Now add a column for the second
~H v ~S _ premise by applying the rule of
~O disjunction to the “~H” and “~S”
values in the table.
O H S ~H ~S H&S O  (H&S) ~H v ~S
T T T F F T T F
T T F F T F F T
T F T T F F F T
T F F T T F F T
F T T F F T T F
F T F F T F T T
F F T T F F T T
F F F T T F T T

Go To Next Slide
O  (H & S) Now add a column for the conclusion
~H v ~S _ by negating the “O” column and
~O determine the validity or invalidity.

O H S ~H ~S H & S O  (H&S) ~H v ~S ~O
T T T F F T T F F
T T F F T F F T F
T F T T F F F T F
T F F T T F F T F
F T T F F T T F T
F T F F T F T T T
F F T T F F T T T
F F F T T F T T T

Go To Next Slide
O  (H & S) There are no cases where the
~H v ~S _ premises are true and the conclusion
~O is false. Thus, this is a valid argument.

O H S ~H ~S H & S O  (H&S) ~H v ~S ~O
T T T F F T T F F
T T F F T F F T F
T F T T F F F T F
T F F T T F F T F
F T T F F T T F T
F T F F T F T T T
F F T T F F T T T
F F F T T F T T T

Go To Next Slide
Obviously there are more complex arguments than the
ones addressed in this tutorial. However, if you are
systematic in applying the rules, the complexity is
irrelevant.

If you would like more practice with building

truth tables click here.

This is the end of this

tutorial