Bifalgorithm post · Brisk · Chapter 1

Why are predicates more useful than individual propositions?

Why are predicates more useful than individual propositions? (Brisk · Chapter 1) — "Propositional logic can represent a lot of things, but it turns out to be t…

Ideas in this flowchart

  • La lógica de predicados supera las limitaciones prácticas de la lógica proposicional.
  • La lógica proposicional puede representar muchas cosas, pero resulta demasiado limitada para ser prácticamente útil.
  • Cada proposición es un bloque opaco de verdad o falsedad, sin partes constituyentes que puedan descomponerse.
  • Para afirmar que cada estado tiene gobernador, habría que crear una proposición distinta para cada estado y unirlas con una conjunción.
  • Se necesita una plantilla proposicional que permita crear proposiciones similares al introducir distintos valores.
  • Un predicado es una fórmula que produce una proposición para cada valor de sus entradas.
  • Los predicados constituyen la base de la lógica de predicados, o lógica de predicados de primer orden.
  • HasGovernor(x) expresa que x es un estado que tiene gobernador; por ejemplo, HasGovernor(Virginia).
  • Un predicado puede entenderse como una función que asigna objetos a proposiciones: HasGovernor : Ω → P.
  • El dominio de la función es Ω, el dominio completo de discurso.
  • Por tanto, se puede introducir cualquier elemento del dominio, incluso mayonnaise: ¬HasGovernor(mayonnaise).
  • Un solo predicado evita definir cincuenta proposiciones casi idénticas.
Feed/

Why are predicates more useful than individual propositions?

Channel

Brisk

1 page

"Propositional logic can represent a lot of things, but it turns out to be too limiting to be practically useful. Every proposition is its own opaque chunk of truthhood or falsity, with no way to break it down into constituent parts. Suppose I wanted to claim that every state in the union had a governor. To state this in propositional logic, I’d have to create a brand new proposition for each state: Let G1 be the proposition that Alabama has a governor. Let G2 be the proposition that Alaska has a governor. Let G3 be the proposition that Arizona has a governor. … and then, finally, I could assert: G1 ∧ G2 ∧ G3 ∧ · · · ∧ G50. What we need is some kind of proposition template, with which we can “mint” new propositions of a similar form by plugging in new values. This is exactly what a predicate is, which forms the basis for predicate logic, or “first-order predicate logic,” to be more exact. A predicate is a formula that yields a proposition for each value of its inputs. For instance, I can define a predicate called “HasGovernor” as follows: Let HasGovernor(x) be the proposition that x is a state that has a governor. Then I can assert: HasGovernor(Virginia) to state that Virginia has a governor. This mechanism alleviates the need to define fifty nearly-identical propositions. Instead, we define one predicate. You can think of a predicate as a function mapping objects to propositions: HasGovernor : Ω → P, where P is the set of all propositions. Note that the domain of this function is Ω, the entire domain of discourse. This means that you can give any individual element from the domain of discourse to the predicate. For instance, we can assert: ¬HasGovernor(mayonnaise), which is perfectly true."

Flowchart preview
Series cover
👍
0
0 comments0 shares

Sign in to view and post comments.