Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th May 2012 20:09 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 517327
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"true x true = true
true x false = false
false x true = true
false x false = true
true x false = false
false x true = true
false x false = true
shouldn't it be
true x true = true
true x false = false
false x true = false
false x false = true
? "
No, for the implication, true x false = false is correct. Read: "from something true, a false statement cannot emerge"; and false x true = true is also correct, because "from something false, a true statement can emerge". That's the implication, it's not the "logical and" or "logical xor" (in which case your commented statement would be correct). Implication means "if A then B" (formal: "A implies B"), and the whole construct (not only A and B) can have a truth value. More formal: A -> B <=> -A v B (read "A implies B when not A or B"), and you can put in true and false for A and B and check for all 4 cases.
However, law isn't logic. From something plain stupid, a ridiculous ruling can always emerge. :-)




Member since:
2005-07-06
true x false = false
false x true = true
false x false = true
shouldn't it be
true x true = true
true x false = false
false x true = false
false x false = true
?