1
$\begingroup$

Can anyone give me a counterexample for a relation $R\subset M\times M$ for the statement $R\text{ antisymmetric} \wedge R\text{ not reflexive}\implies R\text{ asymmetric}$

2 Answers 2

2

No, because a relation is asymmetric if and only if it is antisymmetric and not reflexive.

To see that your implication is always true, we could check the contrapositive statement: If R is symmetric then R is not antisymmetric or R is reflexive. This is easily seen to be true since if R is symmetric and anti-symmetric, it is a sub-relation of the equality relation, in which case it is obviously reflexive.

  • 1
    I see it now. Let's forget what I was talking about.2012-12-10
1

Actually the answer is yes, since a relation is asymmetric if and only if it is antisymmetric and "irreflexive". There are three distinct properties of a relation, reflexive, irreflexive, and neither reflexive nor irreflexive. Plus, M = {1, 2} and R = {(1, 1), (1, 2)} is a correct counterexample. This R is antisymmetric and not reflexive but it is not asymmetric.