Is this predicate-logic formula a tautology

discrete mathematicslogicpredicate-logic

$$F(x) \rightarrow \forall x F(x)$$
My teacher says that the formula is a tautology. Because when the antecedent is false, all the formula should always true, and when the antecedent is true, consequent can be infered by using $\forall +$ rule.

Is this correct? I thought some problem in it, but I can't point it out. Sorry for my poor English.

Best Answer

  1. The given open formula $$F(x) \rightarrow \forall x F(x)$$ contains a free variable $x,$ so it is merely a propositional function (predicate) rather than a proposition (sentence).
  2. It is logically equivalently to $$F(x) \rightarrow \forall y F(y).$$
  3. It is invalid (false in some interpretation), and therefore not a tautology (neither an FOL nor a PL tautology):
          domain of discourse: days of $2021$
          $F(x)$ := $\;x$ is Friday
  4. But it is satisfiable (true in some interpretation, i.e., not a contradiction):
          domain of discourse: $\mathbb Z$
          $F(x)$ := $\;x+1=x.$
Related Question