Proof

(related to Lemma: Denying the Antecedent of an Implication)

We want to prove that the mixing-up the sufficient and necessary conditions is a fallacy. * The fallacy can be formulated in propositional logic as $(p\Rightarrow q)\wedge \neg p\Rightarrow \neg q.$ * The definitions of the implication "$\Rightarrow$" and the negation "$\neg$" give us the following truth table of the function:

$[[p]]_I$ $[[q]]_I$ $[[p\Rightarrow q]]_I$ $[[\neg p]]_I$ $[[\neg q]]_I$
$0$ $0$ $1$ $1$ $1$
$0$ $1$ $1$ $1$ $0$
$1$ $0$ $0$ $0$ $1$
$1$ $1$ $1$ $0$ $0$

Thank you to the contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0!

Github:
bookofproofs


References

Bibliography

  1. Kane, Jonathan: "Writing Proofs in Analysis", Springer, 2016