[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 14 KB, 979x428, implications.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
6016301 No.6016301 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

This doesn't make sense (at least from a logical standpoint). Why is the result of the implication operator (if, then) true if the condition is false?

In programming for instance, if the condition isn't met in a conditional statement, it skips over the "then" part of the condition.

>> No.6016311
File: 2.67 MB, 400x225, implications.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

if you >imply something which is wrong you can get a wrong result

>> No.6016312

it is "vacuously" true. god i loved logic

>> No.6016329
File: 652 KB, 1920x1080, EmmaStoneGravity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Combinatorically, there 16 functions which take two inputs and give up to two different ouputs, see


The material implication you refer to is one of them.
For practical, as well as for historical reasons, this operation is part of the standard presentation of classical propositional logic - but one doesn't have to adopt it.
Moreover, you're right is feeling uneasy regarding to what extend the material implication really captures the intuitive "if then" relation. Many more complicated logics are formed around extending this, e.g.

That being said, evidently it works for doing formal mathematics and these two questions on math stackexchange ask exactly your question:



>> No.6016333

IF 2=-2
THEN (2)^2 = (-2)^2

>> No.6016341

Implication is strongly related to subset, just like conjunction is related to intersection, and disjunction to union.

If we let P = { x | p(x) } and Q = { x | q(x) } (meaning P is the set of x that has property p, and Q the set of x that has property q), we can write:

P ⊂ Q ≡ ( x ∈ P → x ∈ Q)

Now you can think of it visually using the analog of subset, and it should become clear.

>> No.6016348

P ⊂ Q ≡ ( x ∈ P → x ∈ Q) ≡ ( p(x) → q(x) ) *

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.