In predicate logic, existential generalization[1][2] (also known as existential introduction, ∃I) is a valid rule of inference that allows one to move from a specific statement, or one instance, to a quantified generalized statement, or existential proposition. In first-order logic, it is often used as a rule for the existential quantifier ( ∃ {\displaystyle \exists } ) in formal proofs.
Example: "Rover loves to wag his tail. Therefore, something loves to wag its tail."
Example: "Alice made herself a cup of tea. Therefore, Alice made someone a cup of tea."
Example: "Alice made herself a cup of tea. Therefore, someone made someone a cup of tea."
In the Fitch-style calculus:
where Q ( a ) {\displaystyle Q(a)} is obtained from Q ( x ) {\displaystyle Q(x)} by replacing all its free occurrences of x {\displaystyle x} (or some of them) by a {\displaystyle a} .[3]
According to Willard Van Orman Quine, universal instantiation and existential generalization are two aspects of a single principle, for instead of saying that ∀ x x = x {\displaystyle \forall x\,x=x} implies Socrates = Socrates {\displaystyle {\text{Socrates}}={\text{Socrates}}} , we could as well say that the denial Socrates ≠ Socrates {\displaystyle {\text{Socrates}}\neq {\text{Socrates}}} implies ∃ x x ≠ x {\displaystyle \exists x\,x\neq x} . The principle embodied in these two operations is the link between quantifications and the singular statements that are related to them as instances. Yet it is a principle only by courtesy. It holds only in the case where a term names and, furthermore, occurs referentially.[4]
This logic-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.