Common shorthand for ‘modus ponendo ponens’, the rule of inference entitling us to pass from p, and p → q, to q.
| Philosophy Dictionary: modus ponens |
Common shorthand for ‘modus ponendo ponens’, the rule of inference entitling us to pass from p, and p → q, to q.
| 5min Related Video: Modus ponens |
| Wikipedia: Modus ponens |
In classical logic, modus ponendo ponens (Latin for mode that affirms by affirming;[1] often abbreviated to MP or modus ponens) is a valid, simple argument form sometimes referred to as affirming the antecedent or the law of detachment. It is closely related to another valid form of argument, modus tollens or "denying the consequent".
Modus ponens is a very common rule of inference, and takes the following form:
Contents |
The modus ponens rule may be written in sequent notation:

or in rule form:

The argument form has two premises. The first premise is the "if–then" or conditional claim, namely that P implies Q. The second premise is that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim, is true. From these two premises it can be logically concluded that Q, the consequent of the conditional claim, must be true as well. In Artificial Intelligence, modus ponens is often called forward chaining.
An example of an argument that fits the form modus ponens:
This argument is valid, but this has no bearing on whether any of the statements in the argument are true; for modus ponens to be a sound argument, the premises must be true for any true instances of the conclusion. An argument can be valid but nonetheless unsound if one or more premises are false; if an argument is valid and all the premises are true, then the argument is sound. For example, I might be going to work on Wednesday. In this case, the reasoning for my going to work (because it is Tuesday) is unsound. The argument is only sound on Tuesdays (when I go to work), but valid on every day of the week. A propositional argument using modus ponens is said to be deductive.
In metalogics, modus ponens is the cut rule. The cut-elimination theorem says that the cut is valid (an admissible rule) in some logical calculus (sequent calculus).
The validity of modus ponens in classical two-valued logic can be clearly demonstrated by use of a truth table.
| p | q | p → q |
|---|---|---|
| T | T | T |
| T | F | F |
| F | T | T |
| F | F | T |
In instances of modus ponens we assume as premises that p → q is true and p is true. Only one line of the truth table - the first - satisfies these two conditions. On this line, q is also true. Therefore, whenever p → q is true and p is true, q must also be true.
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| Best of the Web: Modus ponens |
Some good "Modus ponens" pages on the web:
Math mathworld.wolfram.com |
| affirming the antecedent (philosophy) | |
| detachment (philosophy) | |
| Curry's paradox (philosophy) |
| What is the plural of the Latin Modus Operandi have seen Modi Operandi and Modus Operands? | |
| How do you pronounce modus operandi? | |
| What does Modus Tollens mean in English? |
Copyrights:
![]() | Philosophy Dictionary. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Copyright © 1994, 1996, 2005 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Modus ponens". Read more |
Mentioned in