A simple interactive truth table for the Peirce stroke, or ‘Not-Or’. Click ‘start’, then click on the atomic components ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag their truth-values to the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ in the proposition. You’ll then be presented with a T/F option to choose the truth value of the proposition. Click on ‘Check’ to check your work.

A simple interactive truth table for the Sheffer stroke, or ‘Not-And’. Click ‘start’, then click on the atomic components ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag their truth-values to the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ in the proposition. You’ll then be presented with a T/F option to choose the truth value of the proposition. Click on ‘Check’ to check your work.

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of the Dilemma.

Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of the two different forms of Disjunctive Syllogism:


Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of Affirming the Consequent

Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of Denying The Antecedent:

Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of Modus Ponens:

Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

A simple interactive truth table for proving the validity of Modus Tollens:

Click ‘start’ to begin. Then click on the ‘P’ and ‘Q’ on the left to drag the truth-values to the atomic components of the sentences. You’ll see a T/F appear under each connective. Set the correct values and click on ‘Check’ to verify. When the table is completed, it will prompt you to highlight any rows with a false conclusion, and then circle the truth-values of the premises to verify if they are both true. If there are no rows with true premises and a false conclusion, it’s valid (by definition).

An extension of the Venn diagram app to demonstrate the non-ampliative* properties of deduction.

*see, e.g. section 3 of Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on ‘Arguments and Inference’