Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements

Section 3.1 Predicates and Quantified Statements I

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 1 / 63

Synopsis

Objective: Introduction to quantifiers “for all” and “there exist”.

Predicate, domain, truth set.
The universal quantifier, ∀.
The existential quantifier: ∃.
Formal vs informal language.
Universal conditional statements.
Equivalent forms of universal and existential statements.
Implicit Quantification.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 2 / 63

Predicate, domain

Definition
A predicate is a sentence that contains a finite number of variables
and becomes a statement when specific values are substituted for the
variable.

The domain of a predicate variable is the set of all values that may
be substituted in place of the variable.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 3 / 63

Example 3.1.1
Let P(x) be the predicate “x 2 > x” with domain the set R of all real
numbers.
Write P(2), P( 12 ), and P(− 12 ), and indicate which of these statements are
true and which are false.
.......................................................................

Solution.
P(2) : 22 > 2, or 4 > 2. True.

   2
1 1 1 1 1
P : > , or > . False.
2 2 2 4 2

   2
1 1 1 1 1
P − : − >− , or >− . True.
2 2 2 4 2

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 4 / 63

Truth set

Definition
If P(x) is a predicate and x has domain D, the truth set of P(x) is the
set of all elements of D that make P(x) true when substituted for x.

The truth set of P(x) is denoted

{x ∈ D|P(x)}

Example.
Z+ = {x ∈ Z|x > 0}
“The set of all integers x such that x > 0.”

The domain is Z and the predicate, P(x) is .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 5 / 63

Example

Let P(x) be the predicate “|x| < 4” and Q(x) be the predicate “x 2 = 8”,
and the domain is the set of integers.
Find the truth set of P(x) and Q(x).
.......................................................................

Solution
The truth set of P(x) = {−3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3}.

Clearly there is no integer x such that x 2 = 8.

Thus the truth set of Q(x) is the empty set, denoted as {} ( or ∅).

In other words, there is no element in the truth set of Q(x).

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 6 / 63

The universal quantifier, ∀

Definition
Let Q(x) be a predicate and D the domain of x.
A universal statement is a statement of the form

∀x ∈ D, Q(x).

It is defined to be true if and only if Q(x) is true for every x in D.

It is false if and only if Q(x) is false for at least one x in D.
A value for x for which Q(x) is false is called a counterexample to
the universal statement.

“∀x ∈ D” is read as “for all x in the set D”.

Some books just use “ ∀xQ(x)” when the domain is clear from the
context.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 7 / 63
Example
a. Let D = {2, 3, 4}. Show that the following statement is true.
∀x ∈ D, x > 1/x.

b. Find a counterexample to the statement “ ∀x ∈ Z, x > 1/x ”.

.......................................................................
Solution.
a. Use the method of exhaustion (i.e. exhaust all the possibilities).
Obviously,
1 1 1
2> , 3> , 4> .
2 3 4
Therefore the predicate “x > 1/x” is true for all x ∈ D.
Therefore, the statement “∀x ∈ D, x > 1/x” is true.

b. Take x = 1. Then ∈ Z and 1 6> 1 = 11 .

Therefore the statement “∀x ∈ Z, x > 1/x” is false.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 8 / 63
The existential quantifier: ∃

Definition
Let Q(x) be a predicate and D the domain of x.
An existential statement is a statement of the form

∃x ∈ D such that Q(x)

It is true if and only if Q(x) is true for at least one x in D.

It is false if and only if Q(x) is false for all x in D.

“∃x ∈ D” is read as “there exists x in the set D”.

Some books just use “∃x ∈ D, Q(x)” or simply “∃xQ(x)” when the
domain is clear from the context.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 9 / 63
Example

a. Show that the following statement is true.

∃x ∈ R such that x 4 < x 2 .

.......................................................................

Solution:
a. We just choose a nice small number, so that it is easy to check.
1
Take x = 2 ∈ R. Then
 4  2
1 1 1 1
= < = .
2 16 4 2

Therefore the statement is true.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 10 / 63
Example

b. Let D = {3, 4, 5}. Determine whether the following statement is true

or false.
∃x ∈ D such that x 4 < x 2 .

.......................................................................

Solution:
b. Again, we use the method of exhaustion.

34 = 81 ≮ 9 = 32 , 44 = 256 6< 16 = 42 , 54 = 625 ≮ 25 = 52 .

Therefore, statement “∃x ∈ D such that x 4 < x 2 ” is false.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 11 / 63

Formal vs informal language.

It is important to be able to

translate from formal to informal language.

- to make sense of mathematical concepts.

translate back from informal language to formal language.

- when thinking out a complicated problem.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 12 / 63

Example 3.1.5a

Rewrite the following formal statement in a variety of equivalent but more

informal ways. Do not use the symbol ∀ or ∃.

∀x ∈ R, x 2 ≥ 0.
.......................................................................

Solution:
All real numbers have nonnegative squares.

Every real number has a nonnegative square.

x has a nonnegative square, for each real number x.

The square of any real number is nonnegative.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 13 / 63

Universal conditional statements.

Universal conditional statement:

∀x ∈ D, if P(x) then Q(x).

Example.

“If a real number x + 2 is rational, then x is rational”

can be rewritten formally as

“∀x ∈ R, if x + 2 ∈ Q then x ∈ Q”.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 14 / 63

Equivalent forms of universal and existential statements.

∀x ∈ U, if P(x) then Q(x)

can be rewritten as
∀x ∈ D, Q(x),
where D = {x ∈ U|P(x)}.

Conversely, ∀x ∈ D, Q(x) can be rewritten as

∀x, if x is in D then Q(x).

Similarly,
“ ∃x such that P(x) and Q(x)”
can be rewritten as
“ ∃x ∈ D such that Q(x)”,
where D is the set of all x for which P(x) is true.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 15 / 63
Example 3.1.11
A prime number is an integer greater than 1 whose only positive integer
factors are itself and 1. Consider the statement

“There is an integer that is both prime and even.”

Let Prime(n) be“n is prime” and Even(n) be “n is even”.

.......................................................................

Use the notation Prime(n) and Even(n) to rewrite this statement in the
following forms:

∃n ∈ Z such that ∧ .

∃ n such that .

∃ n such that .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 16 / 63

Implicit Quantification

Notation
Let P(x) and Q(x) be predicates with D, the common domain of x.

The notation P(x) ⇒ Q(x) means that every element in the truth set
of P(x) is in the truth set of Q(x).

Equivalently, “ ∀x ∈ D, P(x) → Q(x)”.

The notation P(x) ⇐⇒ Q(x) means that P(x) and Q(x) have
identical truth sets, or equivalently, “∀x ∈ D, P(x) ↔ Q(x)”.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 17 / 63

Example

“If a real number x + 2 is rational, then x is rational”

can be rewritten formally as

“ ∀x ∈ R, (x + 2 ∈ Q) → (x ∈ Q) ”.

Equivalently, “x + 2 ∈ Q =⇒ x ∈ Q”.

In fact, a stronger statement is also true.

“ ∀x ∈ R, (x + 2 ∈ Q) ↔ (x ∈ Q) ”.

Equivalently, “x + 2 ∈ Q ⇐⇒ x ∈ Q”.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 18 / 63

Check

If P(x) is a predicate with domain D, the truth set of P(x) is denoted

. We read these symbols out loud as .

Some ways to express the symbol ∀ in words are .

Some ways to express the symbol ∃ in words are .

A statement of the form “∀x ∈ D, Q(x)” is true if and only if, Q(x)
is for .

A statement of the form “∃x ∈ D such that Q(x)” is true if and

only if, Q(x) is for .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.1 Predicates and Quantified statements I 19 / 63

 Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements
Section 3.2 Introduction to Predicates and Quantified
Statements II

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 20 / 63

Synopsis

Objective: Discuss statements involving quantifiers and connectives.

Negation of quantified statements.

Negations of universal conditional statements.
The relation among ∀, ∃, ∧, and ∨.
Vacuous truth of universal statements.
Variants of universal conditional statements.
Necessary and sufficient conditions, Only if.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 21 / 63

Negation of quantified statements

Consider this statement “All student reached LT27 on time”.

Is this statement true?

What is the negation of the statement above?

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 22 / 63

Negation of quantified statements

Theorem 3.2.1 Negation of a Universal Statement

The negation of a statement of the form
∀x in D, Q(x)

is logically equivalent to a statement of the form

∃x in D such that ¬Q(x).

Symbolically,
¬(∀x ∈ D, Q(x)) ≡ ∃x ∈ D such that ¬Q(x).

¬ (“all are”) = “some are not”

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 23 / 63

Negation of quantified statements

Theorem 3.2.2 Negation of an Existential Statement

The negation of a statement of the form
∃x in D such that Q(x)

is logically equivalent to a statement of the form

∀x in D, ¬Q(x).

Symbolically,
¬(∃x ∈ D such that Q(x)) ≡ ∀x ∈ D, ¬Q(x).

¬ (“some are”) = “all are not”

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 24 / 63

Example
Write down the formal and informal negations of the following statements.
a. All MAS courses have final examinations.
b. ∃x ∈ Z+ such that x 2 + 1 is a square.
c. No students sleep before 12 midnight.
.......................................................................
Answer:
a. Formal: ∃ MAS course x such that x has no final examination.
Informal:
b. Formal:
Informal: One plus the square of a positive integer is not a square.
c. Formal:
Informal: Some students sleep before 12 midnight.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 25 / 63
Negations of universal conditional statements

Recall:
1. ¬(∀x, P(x) → Q(x)) ≡ ∃x such that ¬(P(x) → Q(x)).

2. ¬(P(x) → Q(x)) ≡ P(x) ∧ ¬Q(x).

Therefore, we have the following.

¬(∀x, P(x) → Q(x)) ≡ ∃x such that P(x) ∧ ¬Q(x),

or less symbolically,

¬(∀x, if P(x) then Q(x)) ≡ ∃x such that P(x) and ¬Q(x).

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 26 / 63

Example
Write down a formal negation for Goldbach’s conjecture.
“Every even integer greater than 2 can be expressed as a sum of two
primes.”
.......................................................................

Answer:
∃n ∈ Z such that n is even, n > 2, and n cannot be
expressed as a sum of two primes.

Or even better:

Let P denote the set of primes.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 27 / 63

The relation among ∀, ∃, ∧, and ∨

Question: Why is the negation of “for all ...” = “there exists ...”?

Answer: De Morgan’s Law.

Example: Let D = {0, 1, 2, 3}. Then “∀x ∈ D, Q(x)” is the same as

Q(0) ∧ Q(1) ∧ Q(2) ∧ Q(3).

Therefore the negation is

¬Q(0) ∨ ¬Q(1) ∨ ¬Q(2) ∨ ¬Q(3),

i.e. “∃x ∈ D such that ¬Q(x)”.

Similarly, negation of “there exists ...” = “for all ... ”.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 28 / 63
Vacuous truth of universal statements

A statement
∀x in D, if P(x) then Q(x)
is called vacuously true or true by default if and only if P(x) is false for
every x ∈ D.

Example: The following statements are vacuously true.

∀ student x in MH1300, if x is only 5 years old then he is married two

years ago.

∀x ∈ Z, (x > x) → (the sun rises in the west).

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 29 / 63

Variants of universal conditional statements

Definition
Consider a statement of the form
∀x ∈ D, if P(x) then Q(x).

1. Its contrapositive is the statement

∀x ∈ D, if ¬Q(x) then ¬P(x).

2. Its converse is the statement

∀x ∈ D, if Q(x) then P(x).

3. Its inverse is the statement

∀x ∈ D, if ¬P(x) then ¬Q(x).

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 30 / 63

Example

Write down its contrapositive, converse, and inverse for the statement
∀a ∈ R, if a < −3 then x 3 + ax + 2 has 3 distinct real roots.

.......................................................................

Contrapositive:

Converse:

Inverse:

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 31 / 63

Variants of universal conditional statements

Recall from conditional statements in §2.3.

Conditional statement ≡ contrapositive statement.

Conditional statement 6≡ converse statement.
Conditional statement 6≡ inverse statement.
Converse statement ≡ inverse statement.

Same rules apply for universal conditional statements.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 32 / 63

Necessary and sufficient conditions, Only if

Definition
1. “∀x, r (x) is a sufficient condition for s(x)” means
“∀x, if r (x) then s(x).”

2. “∀x, r (x) is a necessary condition for s(x)” means

“∀x, if ¬r (x) then ¬s(x)”, equivalently, “∀x, if s(x) then r (x)”.

3. “∀x, r (x) only if for s(x)” means

“∀x, if ¬s(x) then ¬r (x)”, equivalently, “∀x, if r (x) then s(x)”.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 33 / 63

Example

The statements,

a. ∀x ∈ Z, (x > x) → (the sun rises in the west).

b. ∀a ∈ R, if a < −3 then x 3 + ax + 2 has 3 distinct real roots.

can be rewritten as

a. ∀x ∈ Z, (x > x) is a sufficient condition for the sun to rise in the

west.

b. ∀a ∈ R, x 3 + ax + 2 has 3 distinct real roots is a necessary condition

for a < −3.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 34 / 63

Check

A negation for “All R have property S” is

“There is R such that property S”.

A negation for “Some R have property S” is

“ R property S”.

What is a negation, the converse, contrapositive, and inverse of

“For all x, if x has property P then x has property Q”
property P property Q.
For all x, if x then x .
For all x, if x then x .
For all x, if x then x .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.2 Predicates and Quantified statements II 35 / 63

 Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements

Section 3.3 Statements containing Multiple Quantifiers

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 36 / 63

Synopsis

Objective: Familiarize with statements containing multiple quantifiers.

Make precise mathematical statements involving multiple
quantifiers.

Motivation.
Translating from Informal to formal language.
Negations of multiply-quantified statements.
Order of quantifiers.
Formal logical notation.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 37 / 63

Motivation

Recall the hand game:

scissors-paper-stone (or rock)
Rules of the game:
Scissors defeats paper.
Paper defeats stone.
Stone defeats scissors.
.......................................................................
Let G = { scissors, paper, stone }.
We may make the following statement.

For every x ∈ G , there exists another y ∈ G such that y defeats x.

Symbolically, .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 38 / 63

∀...∃...

In general, we make statements of the following form.

∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y ).

- You need not specify y until x is given.

- Hence, you may use a different y for each different x.

- True when for every given x, you can find a y that “works” for x.

- False when you find an x where none of the y “works”.

- Statement contains more than one quantifier.

- Perform actions in the order in which the quantifiers appear.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 39 / 63

∃...∀...

Similarly, we use

∃x ∈ D such that ∀y ∈ E , Q(x, y ).

- It means there is one particular x ∈ D that “works” for all y ∈ E .

- True when you find such an x.

- False when no one particular x works for all the y .

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 40 / 63

Translating from Informal to formal language

Informal: “Every student in MH1300 belongs to some tutorial group

of MH1300.”

Formal: “∀ student x in MH1300, ∃ tutorial group y in

{tutorial groups of MH1300} s. t. x belongs to y ”.

Statement is True.
.......................................................................
Informal: “Some students in MH1300 attempted all the problems in
tutorial 2.”

Formal: “∃ student x in MH1300 such that ∀ problem y in Tutorial 2,

x attempted y ”.

Statement is True / False?

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 41 / 63

Example 3.3.5 There is a smallest positive integer

Recall that every integer is a real number.

Real numbers are either positive, negative, or zero.
Write a formal statement involving ∀ and ∃ that says
“There is a smallest positive integer.”

.......................................................................

Answer: ∃m ∈ Z+ such that ∀n ∈ Z+ , m ≤ n.

Statement is true. The number 1 is less than or equal to every positive

integer.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 42 / 63

Example 3.3.6 There is no smallest positive real number

Suppose we are given a positive real number x.

Then x/2 is also positive, and x/2 < x.
Thus, the following statement is true.
“There is no smallest positive real number.”
Write this statement formally using both ∀ and ∃.

.......................................................................

Answer:

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 43 / 63

Example The precise definition of a limit

Let f be a function defined on some open interval that contains the

number a, except possibly at a itself.

Then we say that the limit of f (x) as x approaches a is L, and we write

lim f (x) = L
x→a

if for every number  > 0, there is a number δ > 0 such that for all x ∈ R,

if 0 < |x − a| < δ then |f (x) − L| < .

Write a formal version for this statement.

.......................................................................
Answer:

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 44 / 63

Negations of multiply-quantified statements

Recall 1: ¬(∀x ∈ D, P(x)) ≡ ∃x ∈ D such that ¬P(x).

Recall 2: ¬(∃y ∈ E such that Q(y )) ≡ ∀y ∈ E , ¬Q(y ).

Therefore: ¬(∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y ))

≡ ∃x ∈ D such that ¬(∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y ))
≡ ∃x ∈ D such that ∀y ∈ E , ¬P(x, y ).

Similarly for ¬(∃...∀...P(x, y )).

¬(∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y ))

≡ ∃x ∈ D such that ∀y ∈ E , ¬P(x, y ).

¬(∃x ∈ D such that ∀y ∈ E , P(x, y ))

≡ ∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that ¬P(x, y ).
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 45 / 63
Example

Write down the negation of the precise definition of a Limit,

“∀ > 0, ∃δ > 0 such that ∀x ∈ R, if 0 < |x − a| < δ then |f (x) − L| < .”

.......................................................................

Answer:

I.e.,

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 46 / 63

Order of quantifiers

Caution
If a statement contains two different quantifiers, reversing the order of the
quantifiers can change the truth value of the statement to its opposite.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 47 / 63

Example

Recall previous example

“∀ student x in MH1300, ∃ tutorial group y in

{tutorial groups of MH1300} such that x belongs to y .”

.......................................................................

If we rearrange the order of the quantifiers, we get

“∃ tutorial group y in {tutorial groups of MH1300} such that

∀ student x in MH1300, x belongs to y .”

This is obviously false, and has opposite truth value as the first statement.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 48 / 63

Check

How do we establish the truth of each of the following statements?

“∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y ).”
“∃x in D such that ∀y ∈ E , P(x,y).”

A negation for “∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y )” is

.

A negation for “∃x in D such that ∀y ∈ E , P(x,y)” is

.

Suppose “∀x ∈ D, ∃y ∈ E such that P(x, y )” is true.

Can we say that “∃x in D such that ∀y ∈ E , P(x,y)” is true?

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.3 Multiple Quantifiers 49 / 63

 Chapter 3: The Logic of Quantified Statements

Section 3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 50 / 63

Synopsis

Objective: We extend our knowledge on valid and invalid arguments in

Section 2.3 to quantified statements.

Universal instantiation.
Universal modus ponens.
Use of universal modus ponens in a proof.
Universal modus tollens.
Proving validity of arguments with quantified statements.
Using diagrams to test for validity.
Creating additional forms of argument.
Remark on the converse and inverse errors.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 51 / 63

Universal modus ponens

A famous example:

All men are mortal.

Socrates is a man. Obvious?
∴

It is an example of the following rule, which is the fundamental tool of

deductive reasoning.

The rule of universal instantiation (in-stan-she-AY-shun):

If some property is true of everything in a domain, then it is true of any
particular thing in the domain.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 52 / 63

Universal modus ponens

Modus Ponens
p→q
Universal instantiation + gives
p
∴q

Universal Modus Ponens

Formal Version Informal Version
∀x, if P(x) then Q(x). If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.

P(a) for a particular a. a makes P(x) true.

∴ Q(a). ∴ a makes Q(x) true.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 53 / 63

Example
Rewrite the following argument using quantifiers, variables, and predicate
symbols. Explain why the argument is valid.
If the degree of a polynomial is 3, then it is solvable.
x 3 + 3x 2 + 1 is a degree 3 polynomial.
Therefore x 3 + 3x 2 + 1 is solvable.
.......................................................................
Solution:
Let D(p) be “ ” and S(p) be “p is
solvable”.
Then the argument can be rewritten as
∀ polynomial p, if D(p) then S(p). (Major premise)
3 2
D(x + 3x + 1). (Minor premise)
3 2
∴ S(x + 3x + 1).
This is a form of universal modus ponens, hence argument is valid.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 54 / 63
Use of universal modus ponens in a proof

We use Universal modus ponens very often in proofs, and usually without
even realizing.

Next is an example which will be discussed again in Section 4.1. But first,
here is a definition.

An integer x is even if and only if ∃ integer k such that x = 2k.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 55 / 63

Use of universal modus ponens in a proof

The sum of any two even integers is even.

Proof:
Suppose m and n are particular but arbitrarily chosen even integers. Then
m = 2r for some integer r ,(1) and n = 2s for some integer s.(2) Hence
m + n = 2r + 2s
= 2(r + s).(3)

Now, r + s is an integer,(4) and so 2(r + s) is even.(5) Thus m + n is even.

.......................................................................

(1)
: If an integer is even, then it equals twice some integer.
m is a particular even integer.
∴ m equals twice some integer r .
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 56 / 63
Universal modus tollens

Modus Tollens
p→q
Universal instantiation + gives
¬q
∴ ¬p

Universal Modus Tollens

Formal Version Informal Version
∀x, if P(x) then Q(x). If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.
¬Q(a), for a particular a. a does not make Q(x) true.
∴ ¬P(a). ∴ a does not make P(x) true.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 57 / 63

Example

Let f : R → R be a real valued function.

∀a ∈ R, if lim+ f (x) = lim f (x) = f (a) then f is continuous at a.

x→a x→a−

f is not continuous at 0.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 58 / 63

Proving validity of arguments with quantified statements

Definition
To say an argument form is valid means the following:

No matter what predicates are substituted for the predicate symbols in the
premises, if the resulting premise statements are all true, then the
conclusion is also true.

An argument is called valid if and only if its form is valid.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 59 / 63

Example: Proving validity of universal modus ponens

∀x, if P(x) then Q(x). (Major premise.)

P(a) for a particular a. (Minor premise.)
∴ Q(a). (Conclusion.)

To prove that universal modus ponens is valid, suppose that the

major and minor premises are both true.

( We must show that the conclusion “Q(a)” is also true. )

By the minor premise, P(a) is true for this particular a.

By the universal instantiation rule, the statement “If P(a) then Q(a) is
true for this particular a”.

By modus ponens, Q(a) is also true.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 60 / 63
Converse and Inverse Error

Converse Error (Quantified Form)

Formal Version Informal Version
∀x, if P(x) then Q(x). If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.
Q(a) for a particular a. a makes Q(x) true.
∴ P(a). (invalid conclusion) ∴ a makes P(x) true. (invalid conclusion)

Inverse Error (Quantified Form)

Formal Version Informal Version
∀x, if P(x) then Q(x). If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.
¬P(a), for a particular a. a does not make P(x) true.
∴ ¬Q(a). (invalid conclusion) ∴ a does not make Q(x) true. (invalid conclusion)

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 61 / 63

Creating additional forms of argument
Example:

Transitivity
p→q
Universal instantiation + gives
q→r
∴p→r

Universal Transitivity
Formal Version Informal Version
∀x(P(x) → Q(x)). Any x that makes P(x) true makes Q(x) true.
∀x(Q(x) → R(x)). Any x that makes Q(x) true makes R(x) true.
∴ ∀x(P(x) → R(x)). ∴ Any x that makes P(x) true makes R(x) true.

MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 62 / 63

Check
The rule of universal instantiation says that if some property is true
for in a domain, then it is true for .

If the first two premises of a universal modus ponens are written as

“If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true” and “For a

particular value of a ”, then the conclusion can be

written as “ ”.

If the first two premises of a universal transitivity are written as “Any

x that makes P(x) true makes Q(x) true” and “Any x that makes
Q(x) true makes R(x) true, then the conclusion can be written
as “ ”.
MH1300 Lecture handout 3 (NTU) §3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements 63 / 63