Conceptualized by: Raymond D.

Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology

Worktext in M104

Logic and Set Theory

(Chapter 1, Lesson 3)
by:
RAYMOND D. GARCIA, MA Math
Assistant Professor I

BACHELOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION .

Logic and Set Theory 15

Conceptualized by: Raymond D. Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology
Lesson 3: Tautology

Lesson Objective:
1. Determine whether the given proposition is a tautology

A tautology is a formula which is “always true” – that is, it is true for every assignment of
truth values to its simple components. We can also say that a tautology is a rule of logic.
The opposite of a tautology is a contradiction, a formula which is “always false.” In other
words, a contradiction is false for every assignment of truth values to its simple components.

Example 1:
Show that (p → q) v (q → p) is a tautology.

Solution:
Construct a truth table for (p → q) v (q → p) and show that the formula is always true.

TRUTH TABLE FOR (p → q) v (q → p)

p q p→q q→p (p → q) v (q → p)
T T T T T
T F F T T
F T T F T
F F T T T
Notice that the last column contains only T’s. therefore,
the formula is a tautology

Example 2:
Construct a truth table for (p → q) ˄ (q → r).

Solution:

TRUTH TABLE FOR (p → q) ˄ (q → r)

p q r p→q q→r (p → q) ˄ (q → r)
T T T T T T
T T F T F F
T F T F T F
T F F F T F
F T T T T T
F T F T F F
F F T T T T
F F F T T T

Logic and Set Theory 16

Conceptualized by: Raymond D. Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology
Notice now that constructing truth tables for statements with lots of connectives or lots of
simple statements is pretty tedious and error – prone. While there might be some applications of this
(e.g. to digital circuits), at some point, the best thing would be to write a program to construct truth
tables (and this has surely been done).
The point here is to understand how truth value of a complex statement depends on the truth
values of its simple statements and its logical connectives. In most work, mathematicians don’t
normally use statements which are very complicated from a logical point of view.

Example 3:
(a) Suppose that P is false and P v ∼Q is true. Tell whether Q is true, false, or its truth
value can’t be determined.

(b) Suppose that (P ˄ Q) → R is false. Tell whether Q is true, false, or its truth value can’t
be determined.

Solutions:
(a) Since P v ∼Q is true, either P or ∼Q is true. Since P is false, ∼Q must be true. Hence, Q
must be false.

(b) An if – then statement is false when the “if” part is true and the “then” part is false. Since
(P ˄ Q) → R is false, P ˄ ∼Q is true. An “and” statement is true only when both parts are
true. In particular, ∼Q must be true, so Q is false.

Example 4:
Suppose “x > y” is false
“∫ ( ) ( ) ”
“Calvin Butterball has purple socks” is true

Determine the truth value of the statement,

(x > y →∫ ( ) ( ) ) →∼(Calvin Butterball has purple socks)

Solution:
For simplicity, let
P = “x > y”
Q= ∫ ( ) ( ) ”
R = “Calvin Butterball has purple socks”

We want to determine the truth value of (P → Q) → ∼R. Since a specific truth values are
given for P, Q, and R, we can set up a truth table with a single row using the given values for
them. Hence,
TRUTH TABLE FOR (P → Q) → ∼R
P Q R P→Q ∼R (P → Q) → ∼R
T F T F F T

Therefore, the statement is true.

Logic and Set Theory 17

Conceptualized by: Raymond D. Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology
Example 5:
Determine the truth value of the statement
(10 > 42) → “John Cruz eats chocolate cupcakes”

Solution:
The statement “(10 > 42)” is false. We cannot tell whether the statement “John Cruz eats
chocolate cupcakes” is true or false – but it doesn’t matter. If the “if” part of an “if – then” statement
is false, then the “if – then” statement is true.

The two (2) statements (x and y) are said to be logically equivalent if

x y is a Tautology.
Remarks
Another way of saying this is: For each assignment of truth values to
the simple statements which make up x and y, the statements x and y have
identical truth values.

From a practical point of view, we can replace a statement in a proof by any logically
equivalent statement.
To test whether x and y are logically equivalent, we could set up a truth table to test whether
x y is a tautology – that is, whether x y “has all T’s in its column.” However, it’s easier to set
up a table containing x and y and then check whether the columns for x and for y are the same

Example 6:
Show that P → Q and ∼P v Q are logically equivalent.

Solution:

TRUTH TABLE FOR P → Q and ∼P v Q

P Q P→Q ∼P ∼P v Q
T T T F T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F F T T T

Since the columns for P → Q and ∼P v Q are identical, the two statements are logically
equivalent. This tautology is called Conditional Disjunction. We can use this equivalence to replace
a conditional by a disjunction.

Logic and Set Theory 18

Conceptualized by: Raymond D. Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology
PROBLEM SET NUMBER 1.3A
Tautology

Name: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Course/Year/Section: _____________________________ Score: ___________________
Direction: List down five (5) other examples of tautologies and prove them by constructing their
truth tables.

Logic and Set Theory 19

Conceptualized by: Raymond D. Garcia, MA Math
Assistant Professor 1 – Apayao State College
Chapter 1: Logic Tautology
PROBLEM SET NUMBER 1.3B
Reflection Activity for Chapter 1

Name: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Course/Year/Section: _____________________________ Score: ___________________
Direction: Write down three (3) things you learned about logic. State three (3) difficulties you find
in the topics presented and three (3) questions you can generate from the lesson. Summarize your
answer by filling in the table below.

Three (3) things learned Three (3) difficulties you find Three (3) questions
about logic in the topics generated from the lesson
1. 1. 1.

2. 2. 2.

3. 3. 3.

Logic and Set Theory 20