The Gateway to Computer Science Excellence
0 votes
585 views
Also why conjunction is used with Existential Quantifier and not implication?

I tried to understand the main reason behind the choice of implication or conjunction, but I haven't received the proper answer.
in Mathematical Logic by Active (1.4k points) | 585 views

1 Answer

+1 vote

In my opinion, all combinations make sense,

Implication:

$\forall{x}(P \to C)$: For all $x$, if $P$ is true then $C$ is also true.

$\exists{x}(P \to C)$: There exists atleast a $x$ such that if $P$ is true then $C$ is also true.

Conjunction:

$\forall{x}(P \wedge C)$: For all $x$, Both $P$ and $C$ are true.

$\exists{x}(P \wedge C)$: There exists atleast a $x$, such that both $P$ and $C$ are true.

However, if you will post specific example where you find problem/confusion, question will be more clear.

by Active (1.8k points)

Related questions

Quick search syntax
tags tag:apple
author user:martin
title title:apple
content content:apple
exclude -tag:apple
force match +apple
views views:100
score score:10
answers answers:2
is accepted isaccepted:true
is closed isclosed:true
50,737 questions
57,355 answers
198,479 comments
105,249 users