**Philosophy Index** is a site devoted to the study of philosophy
and the philosophers who conduct it. The site contains a number of philosophy
texts, brief biographies and introductions to philosophers and
explanations on a number of topics. Accredited homeschooling
online at Northgate Academy.

Philosophy Index is a work in progress, a growing repository of knowledge. It outlines current philosophical problems and issues, as well as an overview of the history of philosophy. The goal of this site is to present a tool for those learning philosophy either casually or formally, making the concepts of philosophy accessible to anyone interested in researching them. WOLI offers immigration law course online - fully accredited. ACE credits online at EES.

**Aristotle****Camus****Descartes****Frege****Heidegger****Hobbes****Hume****Kant****Kierkegaard****Locke****Nietzsche****Plato****Quine****Russell****Sartre****Socrates****Wittgenstein**- All Philosophers…

**Aesthetics****Epistemology****Logic****Ethics****Metaphysics****Language****Mind****Politics****TEST PREP KIT**- All Terms & Topics…

The **conditional**, **material conditional** or **material implication** operator is used to symbolize “if… then” statements in symbolic logic. The conditional is a truth-functional operator in logic.

The symbol **→** is used to indicate a conditional relationship, though some systems use **⊃** instead.

“If P, then Q” may be formalized as **P → Q**.

The following truth table illustrates the possible truth values for a conditional expression P → Q, given all possible valuations for propositions P and Q. Specifically, P → Q is only false on the valuation that P is true and Q is false.

P | Q | P → Q |
---|---|---|

T | T | T |

T | F | F |

F | T | T |

F | F | T |

It is noteworthy that a conditional operation is always true if its consequent (the part following the operator) is true. This is not normally considered to be the case in English “if…then” statements, because the → operator is not *really* an if…then operator.

For example, let P be “The Earth orbits the moon” and let Q be “the Earth orbits the Sun”.

In symbolic logic, the statement P → Q in this case is true. However, it translates into English as “If the Earth orbits the moon, then the Earth orbits the Sun”. This intuitively seems to be a false statement, because the antecedent (P) is false (the Earth does not orbit the moon). In logic, however, this operator always produces a true formula if the consequent (Q) is true, even if the antecedent is false.

Similarly, if P instead was “All canines are mammals”, we come to an odd statement. P → Q would still be true, but the English version is now “If all canines are mammals, then the Earth orbits the Sun”. Even though both the antecedent (P) and conseqent (Q) are true in this version, we may be hesitant to claim that the resulting English expression is true, since we expect there to be some dependency expressed by an if…then statement, otherwise it would be meaningless to even state the antecedent if we mean only to say that the Earth orbits the Sun.

Finally, if P and Q are both false, P → Q is true. This again causes confusion in English, since the phrase “If the Earth is flat, then penguins speak English” would be counted as true if symbolized.

Because of these problems, we may more accurately translate the conditional expression P → Q into English by saying “it is not the case that P is true and Q is false“. This may be translated back into symbolic logic as ¬(P ∧ ¬Q) or ¬P ∨ Q, both of which turn out to be logically equivalent to P → Q.

The function of the conditional operator is also known as **material implication**. This should not be confused with **logical implication** ().

The relationship of material implication, P → Q, states that as long as P is true, then Q is true, or in other words, it is never true that P is true and Q is false. In contrast, the logical implication P Q states that P is the case, and therefore, Q is the case. The logical implication P Q states that the material implication formula P → Q is always true, but the logical implication () has no truth value itself, because it describes the relation between formulae, or sets of formulae, rather than any truth-functional operation of them.

In order to avoid confusion, P → Q is usually read as “If P, then Q” rather than “P implies Q” or “P, therefore Q”, those being reserved for logical implication.