is there somebody who could help me understand? These statements were given to me to illustrate a logical consequence:
● p(X) ⊨ p(f(X))
● p(X) ⊨ p(f(Y))
Where p is a predicate symbol a f is a function symbol and {X,Y} should be variables. Question is why is that?
There are some slightly different definitions of logical consequence; they all agree on closed formulae (i.e. sentences) but they may disagree on formulae with free variables.
According to the definition in the Wiki's entry referenced, we have that :
iff :
The issue is : what means "to be true" for a formula $\varphi(x)$ with $x$ free ?
According to one approach [see Dirk van Dalen, Logic and Structure (5th ed - 2013), page 67] :
With this definition, a formula $p(x)$ is true in an interpretation $\mathcal{I}$ iff $\forall x p(x)$ is.
Thus, clearly :
for every term $t$ of the language [intuitively, if $p(x)$ holds iff it holds for every object in the domain, then if $p(x)$ holds, then it holds for an object whatever "named by" $t$].
Example
Let $\mathbb N$ the domain of the interpretation; the predicate $p(x)$ is interpreted as "$x$ is greater or equal to $0$". Let the function $f$ be interpreted as the "successor" function $S$.
Then, in this interpretation, the formula $p(x)$ means : $x \ge 0$.
This formula is true in $\mathbb N$ for every $x$.
With this interpreattion, $p(f(x))$ means : $S(x) \ge 0$.
But $S(x)$ is the successor of $x$, i.e. is $x+1$; thus, the previous formula means : $x+1 \ge 0$, which is again true.