10 Questions
In natural deduction, what does Modus Ponens state?
If A
and A → B
are true, then B
must be true.
What strategy involves showing that assuming the opposite of the conclusion leads to a contradiction?
Proof by Contradiction (Reductio Ad Absurdum)
Which inference rule is applied when deriving B → A
from the assumption of A
?
Conditional Introduction
What is the purpose of Proof by Cases in logical reasoning?
To break down a proof into several cases to lead to the conclusion.
Which step in natural deduction involves applying Conjunction Introduction to derive R ∧ (P ∧ Q)
?
Step 7
In natural deduction, what role do assumptions play?
They are temporary propositions adopted to build arguments.
What is the purpose of inference rules in natural deduction systems?
To move from one set of statements to another based on logical relationships.
Which statement best describes propositional logic?
It provides a language for expressing statements about the world using simple propositions.
What do compound statements in propositional logic result from?
Creating complex relationships between atomic propositions.
How do inference rules contribute to constructing proofs in natural deduction?
By guiding the progression from one logical step to another based on predefined rules.
Study Notes
Natural Deduction: Unveiling the Inner Workings of Propositional Logic
Natural deduction is a formal system with deep roots in the study of logic, grounded in the clear and intuitive presentation of its rules—a lush garden of ideas we'll explore through the lens of propositional logic, assumptions, and inference rules.
Propositional Logic: The Building Blocks
Propositional logic is the foundation of natural deduction, providing a language for expressing statements about the world in terms of simple propositions. These propositions are true or false values assigned to atomic statements such as "it's raining" or "the light is green." Combinations of these atomic propositions create compound statements, such as P ∧ Q
(P and Q are true simultaneously) or ¬P
(notP is true).
Assumptions: A Launchpad for Inference
Assumptions, or hypothetical premises, mark a crucial aspect of natural deduction systems. They allow us to build arguments by temporarily adopting a given proposition as true, only to withdraw it when the argument is complete. For example, to prove A ∧ B → C → A
, we might assume A ∧ B
and then derive C
from that assumption.
Inference Rules: The Engine of Reasoning
Natural deduction systems are syntactic rules for constructing proofs. These rules allow us to move from one set of statements to another, based on logical relationships, without adding new assumptions. Some common inference rules include:

Modus Ponens: If
A
andA → B
are true, thenB
must be true. 
Conditional Elimination: If we can derive
A
fromB → A
, then we can concludeB → A
is true. 
Conditional Introduction: If we can derive
A
fromB
, then we can deriveB → A
. 
Disjunction Elimination: If we can derive
A
orB
, and we know¬A
, then we can deriveB
. 
Disjunction Introduction: If we can derive
A
orB
, then we can deriveA ∨ B
.
Through these rules, we construct proofs, often represented as a series of statements connected by inference steps, with each step labeled and justified by the applied rule.
Proof Strategies: Solving Logical Puzzles
While the inference rules themselves are static and unchanging, the ways we use them to construct proofs can be quite varied. Some common proof strategies include:
 Direct Proof: Constructing a proof directly from the given premises.
 Proof by Contradiction (Reductio Ad Absurdum): Showing that assuming the opposite of the conclusion leads to a contradiction, thus proving the initial statement.
 Proof by Cases: Breaking down a proof into several cases, for which we show that each case leads to the conclusion.
 Proof by Induction: Demonstrating the truth of a statement for a base case and then showing that any extension of the base case preserves the truth of the statement.
Natural Deduction in Action
Let's consider an example of a proof using natural deduction. We'll prove the statement:
(P ∧ Q) → R → R ∧ (P ∧ Q)
 Assume
(P ∧ Q)
 Assume
R → R ∧ (P ∧ Q)
 From (2), apply Modus Ponens using
R
(derived from assumptions, not given) to getR ∧ (P ∧ Q)
 From (1), apply Conjunction Elimination (to derive
P ∧ Q → P
andP ∧ Q → Q
) to getP
andQ
 From (3) and (5), apply Conjunction Introduction to get
R ∧ P
 From (3) and (5), apply Conjunction Introduction to get
R ∧ Q
 From (4), (5), and (6), apply Conjunction Introduction to get
R ∧ (P ∧ Q)
 From (1) and (7), apply Implication Elimination to get the final conclusion
Throughout this example, we temporarily assumed (P ∧ Q)
and R → R ∧ (P ∧ Q)
in (2) and (3), respectively, to show how a conclusion follows from these assumptions. We then proved that the conclusion holds for these assumptions, which in turn justifies the original implication statement.
Natural deduction has opened countless doors to the realm of proving logical statements, and it continues to guide our understanding of formal systems and the intricacies of reasoning. As we explore the depths of propositional logic, assumptions, and inference rules, we'll encounter a myriad of fascinating conundrums and solutions that are sure to challenge and inspire our logical prowess.
Delve into the intricacies of natural deduction, a formal system rooted in the principles of logic, by unraveling the rules of propositional logic, leveraging assumptions for inference, and mastering key inference rules to construct rigorous proofs. Explore proof strategies like direct proof, proof by contradiction, proof by cases, and proof by induction to solve logical puzzles with finesse.
Make Your Own Quizzes and Flashcards
Convert your notes into interactive study material.
Get started for free