Of course the statement is true. A square is a 4-sided plane figure with 4 right angles and 4 equal-length sides, while a rectangle is a 4-sided plane figure with 4 right angles.
However, what we mean when we consider a universal statement like this is that, no matter what we βplug inβ for the variable (βthe shapeβ in this case), the resulting statement is true. When the statement is about a particular shape, we have an implication This means it must be true that, if the actual shape on the left is a square, then it is a rectangle. Great. The shape is a square ( is true) and is a rectangle ( is true), so yes, the implication is true.
Is the implication true of the rectangle in the middle? Well, that shape is not a square ( is false), and it is a rectangle ( is true). But look, we believe that all squares are rectangles, so the statement must be true. Even of a rectangle. The only way this works is if βtrue implies falseβ is true!
Similarly, all squares are rectangles is a true statement, even when we look at a triangle. is false (the triangle is not a square), and is false (the triangle is not a rectangle). Thankfully, we defined implications to be true in this case as well.
We have given shapes that illustrate lines 1, 3, and 4 of the truth table for implications (
Figure 1.2.2). What shape illustrates line 2? That would need to be a shape that was a square and was not a rectangle.... Of course we canβt find one, precisely because the statement is true!