Question

Please explain p implies q

I don't get why its not:
if p is true then p->q true

Answer 1

Is it just by definition or is there something behind it?

Answer 2

if p, then q is notated: p -> q

this is equivalent to saying: -p or q

Answer 3

Is there more to it than that?

Answer 4

there is most likely more to it, but im not sure what your ponderance is about perse

Answer 5

hypothesis -> conclusion
hypothesis implies conclusion

if hypothesis is true then conclusion is true
if hypothesis is false then conclusion false

Answer 6

if hypothesis is false does not imply conclusions are false

Answer 7

if i am human then the moon is real: true
if i am human then the moon is fake: false
i am superman then the moon is real: true
i am superman then the moon is fake: true

Answer 8

a lot of assumptions going on there :)

Answer 9

how about this: why is it equivalent to -p or q

Answer 10

consider it this way.

if our hypothesis has no bearing on the conclusion, there is not cuase and effect, then we are in make believe and anything anyone says is true in make beleive.

Answer 11

if (2+3=7), then (4/3=9) .... we are in make believe land

if (2+3=7), then (4*2=8) .... we are still in make believe land

Answer 12

they are equivalent becasue they have the same exact truth structure

when 2 things are the same, they are equivalent

Answer 13

p->q always true when q true

p false, q false, p->q true because false implying a false is true
p true, q false, p->q false because true implying a false is false

Answer 14

not too sure if thats how id put it, but i see nothing controvertible about it

Answer 15

george boole i believe is regarded as the father of the calculus of logic

Answer 16

Thanks for the help!

Answer 17

sure ;)