# Methods of Proof -- Direct Implication

DevFeed: [Methods of Proof -- Direct Implication](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/methods-of-proof-direct-implication-40303.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://www.jeremykun.com/2013/02/16/methods-of-proof-direct-implication/>)

Published: 2013-02-16T12:56:53Z

Content type: tutorial

Language: en

Sources: [Jeremy Kun](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/jeremy-kun.md>)

Topics: [Math and Logic](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/math-and-logic.md>), [Mathematics](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/mathematics.md>), [Learning](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/learning.md>)

Tags: [contrapositive](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/contrapositive.md>), [direct-implication](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/direct-implication.md>), [induction](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/induction.md>), [mathematics](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/mathematics.md>), [methods-of-proof](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/methods-of-proof.md>), [set-theory](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/set-theory.md>), [syntax](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/syntax.md>), [techniques](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/techniques.md>)

## AI overview

This tutorial introduces a series on mathematical proof techniques for programmers and begins with direct implication. It presents four basic methods--direct implication, contradiction, contrapositive, and induction--and uses set theory to introduce notation and practice.

## Source excerpt

I recently posted an exploratory piece on why programmers who are genuinely interested in improving their mathematical skills can quickly lose stamina or be deterred. My argument was essentially that they don't focus enough on mastering the basic methods of proof before attempting to read research papers that assume such knowledge. Also, there are a number of confusing (but in the end helpful) idiosyncrasies in mathematical culture that are often unexplained.