Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/fonts/TeX/fontdata.js
Skip to main content
Library homepage
 

Text Color

Text Size

 

Margin Size

 

Font Type

Enable Dyslexic Font
Mathematics LibreTexts

17.10: Evaluating Deductive Arguments with Truth Tables

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

Arguments can also be analyzed using truth tables, although this can be a lot of work.

Analyzing arguments using truth tables

To analyze an argument with a truth table:

  1. Represent each of the premises symbolically
  2. Create a conditional statement, joining all the premises to form the antecedent, and using the conclusion as the consequent.
  3. Create a truth table for the statement. If it is always true, then the argument is valid.

Example 34

Consider the argument

Premise:If you bought bread, then you went to the store.Premise:You bought bread.Conclusion:You went to the store.

Solution

While this example is fairly obviously a valid argument, we can analyze it using a truth table by representing each of the premises symbolically. We can then form a conditional statement showing that the premises together imply the conclusion. If the truth table is a tautology (always true), then the argument is valid.

We’ll let b represent “you bought bread” and s represent “you went to the store”. Then the argument becomes:

Premise:bsPremise:bConclusion:s

To test the validity, we look at whether the combination of both premises implies the conclusion; is it true that [(bs)b]s?

bsbsTTTTFFFTTFFT

bsbs(bs)bTTTTTFFFFTTFFFTF

bsbs(bs)b[(bs)b]sTTTTTTFFFTFTTFTFFTFT

Since the truth table for [(bs)b]s is always true, this is a valid argument.

Try it Now 13

Determine whether the argument is valid:

Premise:If I have a shovel, I can dig a hole.Premise:I dug a hole.Conclusion:Therefore, I had a shovel.

Answer

Let S= have a shovel, D=dig a hole. The first premise is equivalent to SD. The second premise is D. The conclusion is S. We are testing [(SD)D]S

SDSD(SD)D[(SD)D]STTTTTTFFFTFTTTFFFTFT

This is not a tautology, so this is an invalid argument.

Example 35

Premise:If I go to the mall, then I’ll buy new jeans.Premise:If I buy new jeans, I’ll buy a shirt to go with it.Conclusion:If I go to the mall, I’ll buy a shirt.

Solution

Let m= I go to the mall, j= I buy jeans, and s= I buy a shirt.

The premises and conclusion can be stated as:

Premise:mjPremise:jsConclusion:ms

We can construct a truth table for [(mj)(js)](ms). Try to recreate each step and see how the truth table was constructed.

mjsmjjs(mj)(js)ms[(mj)(js)](ms)TTTTTTTTTTFTFFFTTFTFTFTTTFFFTFFTFTTTTTTTFTFTFFTTFFTTTTTTFFFTTTTT

From the final column of the truth table, we can see this is a valid argument.


This page titled 17.10: Evaluating Deductive Arguments with Truth Tables is shared under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by David Lippman (The OpenTextBookStore) via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform.

Support Center

How can we help?