Finding the WFF of a Truth Table: Strategies Explained

In summary, the general strategy for finding the wff of a truth table is to form sentences for each row where the wff must evaluate to true, using the atomic propositions set to true and false. These sentences are then "or"ed together to get the wff. Additionally, you can also use De Morgan's laws and other connectives to simplify the expression and make it cleaner.
  • #1
E92M3
68
0
Hi, I'm new to logic. I can fill in a truth table if given a wff but can't do it the other way around. What is the general strategy in finding the wff of a truth table?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There might be more than 1 wff for a given truth-table, but here's how to find one:

For each row where the wff must evaluate to true, form the sentence P1 ^ P2 ^ ... ^ -Q1 ^ -Q2 ^ ... where P1, P2, ... are the atomic propositions set to true in that row, and Q1, Q2, ... those set to false. Then take all these sentences and "or" them, e.g.:


P Q R wff
T T T T -----> P ^ Q ^ R
T T F F
T F T T -----> P^ -Q ^ R
F T T F
T F F F
F T F T -----> -P ^ Q ^ -R
F F T F
F F F T -----> -P ^ -Q ^ -R

Then we get (P ^ Q ^ R) V (P^ -Q ^ R) V (-P ^ Q ^ -R) V (-P ^ -Q ^ -R)

Hopefully you can see why this works.
 
  • #3
But what do you mean by "^"? is it &? How can you have (P^Q^R)? I Thought this can't be a wff. Shouldn't it be like ((P^Q)^R) since two two place connective will require two sets of breckets. Also does -Q mean ~Q?
 
  • #4
Yes, that's what I mean, ^ is &, - is ~.

Note that (A & B) & C = A & (B & C) for all valuations, so A & B & C is unambiguous, semantically speaking. But if you wish, you can put brackets to make it a syntactically correct wff (it's the same story with the or's).
 
  • #5
Then how can I shorten those wff to make them cleaner?
 
  • #6
Well, for example in

(P ^ Q ^ R) V (P^ -Q ^ R) V (-P ^ Q ^ -R) V (-P ^ -Q ^ -R)

you can see that whenever P and R are true, the sentence will be true (the truth value of Q doesn't matter). It's the same whenever -P and -R are true. So I can shorten this as:

(P ^ R) V (-P ^ -R)

Those are the kind of simplifications that you can hope for when dealing with these things.

Edit:

Another way to find wff, is: for each row where the wff must be false, "and" the atomic sentences (negating them if false), "or" all the sentences you obtain, then finally negate the sentence you get. This is preferable if you have more occurrences of true than false, for example

P Q wff
T T T
T F T
F T F
F F T

you get -(-P ^ Q).

You can always try to play with De Morgan's laws to simplify the expressions. You can also try expressing things with other conectives e.g. -(-P ^ Q) = -P -> -Q
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Finding the WFF of a Truth Table: Strategies Explained

What is a WFF in a truth table?

A WFF (Well-Formed Formula) is a statement or proposition that is constructed using logical symbols and follows the rules of a given logic system. In a truth table, a WFF is represented by a combination of truth values (either true or false) assigned to its component propositions.

How do I find the WFF of a truth table?

To find the WFF of a truth table, you first need to identify the component propositions involved in the statement. Next, you need to determine the logical connectives (such as AND, OR, NOT) used to combine these propositions. Finally, you can construct the WFF by placing these propositions and connectives in the appropriate order and following the rules of the logic system.

What are some strategies for finding the WFF of a truth table?

Some strategies for finding the WFF of a truth table include identifying the main connective (the logical connective that connects the two main propositions in the statement), using truth tables to evaluate the different combinations of truth values, and breaking down complex statements into simpler sub-statements.

Why is finding the WFF important in logic?

Finding the WFF is important in logic because it allows us to accurately represent and evaluate complex statements in a systematic manner. By breaking down a statement into its component propositions and using logical connectives, we can determine the truth value of the statement and make logical deductions and inferences.

Can I use different strategies to find the WFF of a truth table?

Yes, there are multiple strategies that can be used to find the WFF of a truth table. The most important thing is to follow the rules of the given logic system and ensure that the resulting WFF accurately represents the original statement.

Similar threads

Back
Top