Principle of Compositionality
Instead of using truth tables, logical connective symbols can be interpreted by means of an interpretation function and a functionally complete set of truth-functions (Gamut 1991), as detailed by the principle of compositionality of meaning. Let I be an interpretation function, let Φ, Ψ be any two sentences and let the truth function fnand be defined as:
- fnand(T,T)=F; fnand(T,F)=fnand(F,T)=fnand(F,F)=T
Then, for convenience, fnot, for fand and so on are defined by means of fnand:
- fnot(x)=fnand(x,x)
- for(x,y)= fnand(fnot(x), fnot(y))
- fand(x,y)=fnot(fnand(x,y))
or, alternatively fnot, for fand and so on are defined directly:
- fnot(T)=F; fnot(F)=T;
- for(T,T)=for(T,F)=for(F,T)=T;for(F,F)=F
- fand(T,T)=T; fand(T,F)=fand(F,T)=fand(F,F)=F
Then
- I(~)=I(¬)=fnot
- I(&)=I(^)=I(&)=fand
- I(v)=I= for
- I(~Φ)=I(¬Φ)=I(¬)(I(Φ))=fnot(I(Φ))
- I(Φ&Ψ) = I(&)(I(Φ), I(Ψ))= fand(I(Φ), I(Ψ))
etc.
Thus if S is a sentence that is a string of symbols consisting of logical symbols v1...vn representing logical connectives, and non-logical symbols c1...cn, then if and only if I(v1)...I(vn) have been provided interpreting v1 to vn by means of fnand (or any other set of functional complete truth-functions) then the truth-value of I(s) is determined entirely by the truth-values of c1...cn, i.e. of I(c1)...I(cn). In other words, as expected and required, S is true or false only under an interpretation of all its non-logical symbols.
Read more about this topic: Truth Function
Famous quotes containing the words principle of and/or principle:
“On principle I dislike an oath which requires a man to swear he has not done wrong. It rejects the Christian principle of forgiveness on terms of repentance. I think it is enough if the man does no wrong hereafter.”
—Abraham Lincoln (18091865)
“The principle that human nature, in its psychological aspects, is nothing more than a product of history and given social relations removes all barriers to coercion and manipulation by the powerful.”
—Noam Chomsky (b. 1928)