Testing argument validity using truth table

Before going to understand the validity of an argument first of all we understand the basic
terms which are discussed below:

Argument:

 Arguments are a set of statements (premises and conclusion).

 The premises provide evidence, reasons, and grounds for the conclusion.
 The conclusion is what is being argued for.
 An argument attempts to draw some logical connection between the premises and the
conclusion.
 And in doing so, the argument expresses an inference: a process of reasoning from the
truth of the premises to the truth of the conclusion.

Premises:
The premises (and there can be more than one) are the statements being offered in
support for the conclusion. The premises also embody the reasons or facts providing evidence
for the conclusion’s credibility.

Conclusion:
The conclusion is the statement being argued for.

Example:

The will world end on August 6, 2045. I know this because my dad told me so and my
dad is smart.

In this instance, the conclusion is the first sentence (“The world will end…”); the premises
(however dubious) are revealed in the second sentence (“I know this because…”).

Truth table:
A Truth Table is a table that lists all the possible combinations of inputs and their
corresponding outputs. It shows how the output of logic circuits changes with different
combinations of logic levels at the input. It is mostly associated with Boolean algebra or areas
where Boolean logic is used. It is a branch of algebra where there are only two values possible
true and false. The variables used in these expressions can take values of true or false, true is
denoted by 1 and false is denoted by 0. It is a systematic representation of all truth values of
a logical expression. If the output columns only contain 0’s then the logical statement is called
a contradiction and if the output column contains both 0’s and 1’s then it is called contingent.
The truth table is primarily used in digital circuits where it is used to validate the output
generated from the various input combinations of the logical expressions. It is also used in
mathematics and other fields which use Boolean logic
Construction of Truth Table
A truth table is a table-like structure with rows and columns. It has some elements
that include Input Variables, Output Variables, and combinations of input variables. The
columns represent the number of input and output variables and the rows represent the
number of all possible combinations. As in truth table we generally work with binary there
will be 2^n number of rows, where n is the number of input variable. Steps involving
construction of truth table are:
1. Identification of input variables and determining the number of rows.
2. Listing all the possible combinations.
3. Determining the output for each combination using the logical expression.

To use a truth table to check the validity of an argument, you need to : 1

1. Symbolize each premise and the conclusion using logical operators.

2. Create a truth table that has a column for each premise and a column for the
conclusion.
3. Identify the critical rows, where all the premises are true.
4. Check if the conclusion is true in all the critical rows. If yes, the argument is valid. If
no, the argument is invalid.

The next thing we need to do is figure out what the truth values of the premises and
conclusion are for each row of the truth table. We are able to determine what those truth
values are because we understand how the truth value of the compound proposition
depends on the truth value of the atomic propositions. Given the meanings of the truth
functional connectives (discussed in previous sections), we can fill out our truth table like
this:

D S SvD ~S D
T T T F T
T F T T T
F T T F F
F F F T F

To determine the truth values for the first premise of the argument ("S v D") we just have to
know the truth values of S and D and the meaning of the truth functional connective, the
disjunction. The truth table for the disjunction says that a disjunction is true as long as at
least one of its disjuncts is true. Thus, every row under the "S v D" column should be true,
except for the last row since on the last row both D and S are false (whereas in the first three
rows at least one or the other is true). The truth values for the second premise (~S) are easy
to determine: we simply look at what we have assigned to "S" in our reference column and
then we negate those truth values - the Ts becomes Fs and the Fs becomes Ts. That is just
what I've done in the fourth column of the truth table above. Finally, the conclusion in the
last column of the truth table will simply repeat what we have assigned to "D" in our
reference column, since the last conclusion simply repeats the atomic proposition "D".

The above truth table is complete. Now the question is: How do we use this completed truth
table to determine whether or not the argument is valid? In order to do so, we must apply
what I'll call the "truth table test of validity". According to the truth table test of validity,
an argument is valid if and only if for every assignment of truth values to the atomic
propositions, if the premises are true then the conclusion is true. An argument is invalid if
there exists an assignment of truth values to the atomic propositions on which the premises
are true and yet the conclusion is false. It is imperative that you understand (and not simply
memorize) what these definitions mean. You should see that these definitions of validity and
invalidity have a similar structure to the informal definitions of validity and invalidity
(discussed in chapter 1). The similarity is that we are looking for the possibility that the
premises are true and yet the conclusion is false. If this is possible, then the argument is
invalid; if it isn't possible, then the argument is valid. The difference, as I've noted above, is
that with the truth table test of validity, we replace having to use your imagination with a
mechanical procedure of assigning truth values to atomic propositions and then
determining the truth values of the premises and conclusion for each of those assignments.

Applying these definitions to the above truth table, we can see that the argument is valid
because there is no assignment of truth values to the atomic propositions (i.e., no row of
our truth table) on which all the premises are true and yet the conclusion is false. Look at
the first row. Is that a row in which all the premises are true and yet the conclusion false?
No, it isn't, because not all the premises are true in that row. In particular, "~S" is false in
that row. Look at the second row. Is that a row in which all the premises are true and yet the
conclusion false? No, it isn't; although both premises are true in that row, the conclusion is
also true in that row. Now consider the third row. Is that a row in which all the premises are
true and yet the conclusion false? No, because it isn't a row in which both the premises are
true. Finally, consider the last row. Is that a row in which all the premises are true and yet the
conclusion false? Again, the answer is "no" because the premises aren't both true in that
row. Thus, we can see that there is no row of the truth table in which the premises are all
true and yet the conclusion is false. And that means the argument is valid.

Since the truth table test of validity is a formal method of evaluating an argument's validity,
we can determine whether an argument is valid just in virtue of its form, without even
knowing what the argument is about! Here is an example:
 1. (A v B) v C
2. ~A
3. ∴ C

Here is an argument written in our symbolic language. I don't know what A, B, and C mean
(i.e., what atomic propositions they stand for), but it doesn't matter because we can
determine whether the argument is valid without having to know what A, B, and C mean. A,
B, and C could be any atomic propositions whatsoever. If this argument form is invalid then
whatever meaning we give to A, B, and C, the argument will always be invalid. On the other
hand, if this argument form is valid, then whatever meaning we give to A, B, and C, the
argument will always be valid.
References
arguments
Logic and the Study of Arguments – Critical Thinking (okstate.edu)

Truth table
Truth Table - GeeksforGeeks

Argument testing
Truth Tables: The truth table test of validity | Saylor Academy