6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments 

For exercise on minute 36.26, I made it on both long and short truth table and it comes up to being valid. Where Professor Thorsby corrected himself, he was not wrong the first time for the Disjunction (~H v G). None of the False lines, 4 total, have all True premises.

I know you posted this years ago but I've been finding your videos very helpful as I'm taking Introduction to Logic. Thank you so much!! These help me understand so much! :-)

Mark, My GPA thanks you for taking the time to make these videos.

37:00 Yeah, the ‘H v G’s final value under the main operator in the final problem is still not correct. It should be T T T T F F T T, which makes the argument valid.

I'm so grateful for these videos. Thank you for taking the time to make these! I have watched a few other videos and none of them are even comparable to your videos. I really enjoy this class now that i understand it.

Thanks for catching that error!

yoo you helped me today thank you sir I was writing a test and got 90% thank you keep it up the good work

Thank you for sharing, you are a saviour. Period.

I appreciate your videos!

Thank you so much, you did such a great job explaining it. It helped me relearn and study for my exam.

The last example has an error in getting the truth values for the disjunction. The argument is actually invalid. This said and done your videos are amazing and have given me great insight into the subject at no cost. Thanks a lot.

Hello. Thanks for your video, super useful. Please could you give an example truth table with 16 lines?

Ok, at the 31:54 spot in the video, you have an exercise that seems confusing because everything is represented by K. K ⊃ ~K // ~K. I'm not sure which pattern of T or F for the K in the conclusion.

Awesome!

Wish I would have seen this my first time taking my philosophy class... very this time around

thank you for helping clear up the actual set up and finding invalidity. The textbook that I use for my class, Intro to logic 12e by irving M and copi Carl Cohen is absolutely terrible in the lack of explaining the why to each concept rather focusing on the whats. The text book you use, although different in set up of the truth table shows the steps clearly. Where my text book shows no steps on how to get the conclusion.

My savior

36:23 Professor Thorsby broke

Also F + F = F on lines 5 and 6.

This is a very helpful explanation. The only question I have is, if a premise has more than one operator, how do I determine which one is the main operator?

at 38:11 its incorrect sir, its a wedge so we only need on T, therefore, its t,t,t,t,f,f,t,t, argument is valid.

I thought that in disjunction T + F = T. On your lines 7 and 8 you have it as F. When I did the problem I found it to be valid. Am I wrong?

how do you figure out which one is the main operator

What is the textbook that you use?

Like