If you have a truth tree with proposition P at the root, what do the paths of the truth tree represent?
Do all the paths collectively represent every possible truths assignment for P? If that is the case why can't we say that P is a tautology if all the paths of P are open? (Since all the paths being open represent that every truth assignment makes the proposition true)
Consequently, if that is not the case and we say that P isn't necessarily a tautology because the paths don't represent all the possible truth assignments of P (meaning that there are some truth assignments not covered, thus leaving us with the possibility that P is a contingency) . Then why is it allowed to say that P is a contradiction if all its paths are closed? Couldn't we by the same argument in this point say that there are still some truth assignments not covered.( hence there is the possibility that P could still be a contingency)
The third "argument" would be a sort of special case of the second argument, which is that the paths collectively represent not all but a "special" type of truth assignments, at which point I fail to see what is special about them
Any input would be appreciated
To expand on Mauro Allegranza headline answer. We are working with a truth tree headed by the formula $P$.