Consider the following arguments. If an argument is valid, then present a proof sequence; otherwise, prove that the argument is invalid. You are forbidden to use truth tables to justify your answers (but, you may use them otherwise).
((p → r) ∨ (q → r)) → ((p ∨ q) → r)
((q → r) ∧ (p → (q ∨ r))) → (p → r)
((p → (q ∧ r)) ∧ (s → r) ∧ (s → t)) → (t → p)
4) a) Given ((p
r) V
(q
r))
((p V
q)
r)
((¬p V r) V (¬q
V r))
(¬(p V q) V
r) { Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
¬((¬p V r) V (¬q
V r)) V (¬(p V q) V r) { Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
(¬(¬p V r)
¬(¬q V r)) V
(¬(p V q) V r) {By De Morgan's law ¬ (P V Q) = ¬P
¬Q }
((¬(¬p)
¬r)
(¬(¬q)
¬r) V ((¬p
¬q) V r) {By De
Morgan's law ¬ (P V Q) = ¬P
¬Q }
(p
¬r)
(q
¬r) V ( r V (¬p
¬q)) {By De
Morgan's law ¬ (¬ P) = P }
(p
q)
(¬r
¬r) V ( r V (¬p
¬q))
{Commutative law (P
Q) = (Q
P)}
(p
q)
(¬r) V ( r V (¬p
¬q)) { we know that ¬P
¬P = ¬P
}
(p
q)
(¬r
V r) V (¬p
¬q) {Associative
law (P V Q) V R = PV (Q V R)}
(p
q)
(T)
V (¬p
¬q) { we know
that ¬P V P = T }
((q
p)
(¬p
¬q) V (T)
{Commutative law (P
Q) = (Q
P)}
(q
p)
(¬p
¬q) V
(T)
q
(p
¬p)
¬q V (T)
{Associative law (P
Q)
R = P
(Q
R)}
q
(F)
¬q
V (T) { we know that P
¬P = F
}
q
¬q
(F)
V (T) {Commutative law (P
Q) = (Q
P)}
(q
¬q)
(F)
V (T) {Associative law (P
Q)
R = P
(Q
R)}
(F)
(F)
V (T) { we know that P
¬P = F
}
(F
F)
V (T) { we know that F
F = F
}
(F) V (T)
{ we know that F V T = T }
(T)
The given argument is Valid
4) b) Given ((q
r)
(p
(q V
r)))
(p
r)
((¬q V
r)
(¬p V (q V
r)))
(¬p V r) {
Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
¬((¬q V
r)
(¬p V (q V r)))
V (¬p V r) { Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
(¬(¬q V r) V
¬(¬p V (q V r))) V (¬p V r) {By De Morgan's law ¬ (P
Q) = ¬P V ¬Q }
((¬(¬q)
¬r)) V (¬(¬p)
¬(q V r))) V (¬p
V r) {By De Morgan's law ¬ (P V Q) = ¬P
¬Q }
((q
¬r)) V (p
(¬q
¬r))) V (¬p V r) {By De Morgan's law ¬ (¬ P) = P }
q
¬r
V (p
¬q)
¬r
V (r V ¬p) {Associative law (P
Q)
R = P
(Q
R)}
q
(p
¬q) V ¬r
¬r V (r V
¬p) {Commutative law (P V Q) = (Q V P)}
p
(q
¬q) V (¬r
¬r) V (r V
¬p) {Commutative law (P
Q) = (Q
P)}
p
(F)
V (¬r) V (r V ¬p) { we know that P
¬P = F
}
p
(F)
V (¬r V r) V ¬p {Associative law (P V Q) V R = PV (Q V
R)}
p
(F)
V (T) V ¬p { we know that ¬P V P = T }
(F) V
(T)
p V ¬p
{Commutative law (P
Q) = (Q
P)}
(F V
T)
(p V ¬p)
{Associative law (P V Q) V R = PV (Q V R)}
(T)
(T) {
we know that ¬P V P = T }
(T)
The given argument is Valid
4) c) Given ((p
(q
r))
(s
r)
(s
t))
(t
p)
((p' V (q
r))
(s' V
r)
(s' V
t))
(t' V
p) { Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
(((p' V (q
r))
(s' V
r)
(s' V t)))' V
(t' V p) { Law of Implies (P
Q)
= ¬PVQ }
((p' V (q
r))' V (s' V r)'
V (s' V t)' ) V (t' V p)
(((p')'
(q
r)') V ((s')'
r') V ((s')'
t') ) V (t' V
p)
((p
(q'
V r')) V (s
r') V (s
t') ) V (t' V
p)
((p
(q'
V r')) V (r'
s) V (s
t') ) V (t' V
p)
p'
q'
V (r' V r')
(s V s)
(t' V t') V p
{Associative law (P V Q) V R = PV (Q V R)}
p'
q'
V (r')
(s)
(t') V p { we know that ¬P V P = T }
p'
p V
q' V (r')
(s)
(t') {Commutative law (P V Q) = (Q V P)}
( p'
p)
V q' V (r')
(s)
(t') {Associative law (P
Q)
R = P
(Q
R)}
(F) V q' V (r')
(s)
(t') { we know that P
P' = F
}
q' V (r') V (F)
(s)
(t') {Commutative law (P V Q) = (Q V P)}
q' V (r') V
(F
s)
(t') {Associative law (P
Q)
R = P
(Q
R)}
q' V (r') V (F)
(t') { we know
that P
F = F
}
q' V (r') V (F
t')
q' V (r') V (F) {
we know that P'
F = F
}
q' V (r' V
F)
q' V
(r')
The given argument is Invalid
Consider the following arguments. If an argument is valid, then present a proof sequence; otherwise, prove...
Valid and invalid arguments expressed in logical notation. Indicate whether the argument is valid or invalid. Prove using a truth table. • p → q q → p —— ∴¬q • p → q ¬p —— ∴¬q
Determine whether the argument is valid or invalid. You may compare the argument to a standard form or use a truth table. p→q -p .q Is the argument valid or invalid? Invalid O Valid
QUESTION 3 Symbolize the following argument using the variables p, q, and r. Then construct a complete truth table to show whether or not the argument is valid. Use 1 for T(true) and 0 for F(false). Valid or Invalid? Why? Prove. Explain what your truth table shows. 10 points Total: 3 points for correct symbolic form, 4 points for valid/invalid and reason, 3 points for correct truth table. If Max studies hard, then Max gets an 'A' or Max gets...
How do you know that this is a valid argument? Show your steps for the proof and explain why. p => (q /\ r) ~q --------------------- ~p
-Use the rules of inference and the laws of propositional logic to prove that each argument is valid. Number each line of your argument and label each line of your proof "Hypothesis" or with the name of the rule of inference used at that line. If a rule of inference is used, then include the numbers of the previous lines to which the rule is applied. For the arguments stated in English, transform them into propositional logic first. a) (10...
5. Symbolize the following argument and prove it is a valid argument. Let B ( x ) = x is a bear; D ( x ) = x is dangerous, and H ( x ) = x is hungry. Every bear that is hungry is dangerous. There is a hungry animal that is not dangerous. Therefore there is an animal that is not a bear. 6. In order to prove an quantificational argument invalid it is only necessary to find a...
Use propositional logic to prove that the following arguments are valid. Do not use truth tables. 1. ( A C)^(C --B) AB: A 2. (P→ (QAR)) AP: (PA) 3. Z. (ZAZ) 4. A: (AV B)^(AVC) 5. (I → H) A (FV-H) AI: F
Construct a proof to demonstrate that the following arguments are valid. You may use any of the 18 implicational and equivalence rules.∼(∼P ⌵ ∼Q)S → ∼(P ⦁ Q)S ⌵ ~R∴ ∼R
Directions. Determine whether the following three arguments are valid using the truth table method. Use the Indirect Truth Table method as found in the link on Canvas. Indicate whether each is valid or not. Note that ‘//’ is used as the conclusion indicator and ‘/’ is used to separate the premises. [Note: Use only the following logical symbols: ‘&’ for conjunctions, ‘v’ for disjunctions, ‘->’ for conditionals, ‘<->’ for biconditionals, ‘~’ for negations.] Show your truth tables. 1. (S <->...