Question# 1
Part A:
Come up with an
instance of argument that conforms to HS.
Derive the
conclusion from the given premises in the argument below by utilizing the rules
of inference (hint: use HS, MT, DS, or some other combination, as an
alternative is available here).
C: B
==================
P1: A V B
P2: C ⊃ D
P3: A ⊃ C
P4: ~D
========================================================================
Part B:
Exercise 31
Do a Proof for the
following argument: Use TT for testing validity. Follow the
three steps:
1. Assign P, Q, and R to the atomic sentences in the order of appearance
in the argument.
2. Formalize the argument.
3. Derive the conclusion from the premises by using the rules of inference.
P1: If things are caused to exist, then the infinite regress of existence
is not possible.
P2: God is not the ultimate cause of existence, only if the infinite
regress of existence is possible.
P3: By the way, things are caused to exist.
C: Therefore, God is the ultimate cause of existence.
[31-2]
“Derive” the conclusion (C) from the 3 premises (1 to 3) in a
formalized argument below by employing rules of inference (i.e., proof, where
you need to come up with additional steps beyond 3 below to lead you to the
conclusion):
C. ~T
—————————–
1. (R V S) ⊃
(T ⊃ K)
2. ~K
3. R V S
—————————–
Part C:
Determine whether the following argument is valid or not
by showing how truth tables are utilized and interpreted:
[26-1] P1: P -> Q
P2: Q -> R
P3:
~R
————————-
C: ~P
[26-2] P1: ~D V ~F
P2: G
-> (D & F)
—————————–
C: ~G
0 comments