Math 2.0

Theorem

Frege's theorem in propositional logic

Statement

( P → ( Q → R )) → (( P → Q ) → ( P → R ))
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

In propositional logic, Frege's theorem refers to this tautology:

(P→(Q→R))→((P→Q)→(P→R))\big(P\to(Q\to R)\big)\to\big((P\to Q)\to(P\to R)\big)

The theorem already holds in one of the weakest logics imaginable, the constructive implicational calculus. The proof under the Brouwer–Heyting–Kolmogorov interpretation reads f↦g↦p↦(f(p)∘g)(p)f \mapsto g\mapsto p\mapsto (f(p)\circ g)(p). In words: "Let f denote a reason that P implies that Q implies R. And let g denote a reason that P implies Q. Then given a f, then given a g, then given a reason p for P, we know both that Q holds by g and that Q implies R holds by f. So R holds."

The truth table to the right gives a semantic proof. For all possible assignments of false () or true () to P, Q, and R (columns 1, 3, 5), each subformula is evaluated according to the rules for material conditional, the result being shown below its main operator. Column 6 shows that the whole formula evaluates to true in every case, i.e. that it is a tautology. In fact, its antecedent (column 2) and its consequent (column 10) are even equivalent.

Further reading

  1. Wikipedia, page 4725226, revision 1364500909, Frege's theorem, section Frege's theorem in propositional logic. adopted
About this page
TagMYJDXMN68Q
URIm2://MYJDXMN68Q
Kindstatement, theorem
WritingW0 stub
StatusThis copy of the site has no build data. Run m2 status MYJDXMN68Q.
Changed4 November 2026

Markdown · JSON · Edit on GitHub

What this page needs for W1

  • edge uses out: each definition that the statement needs (0 of 1)

The writing levels say how complete the text of a page is. They do not measure its truth.

What links here

No page links to this page yet.