Question 1067206: Hello team, would you be so kind to assist with this problem below. I’ve tried to figure out but was wrong. some help is greatly appreciated!
use one of the indirect proof techniques (reduction ad absurdum or conditional proof RAA) to demonstrate the validity of the argument -
(G • P) → K, E → Z, ~P → ~ Z, G → (E v L), therefore, (G • ~L) → K
Answer by Edwin McCravy(20054)   (Show Source):
You can put this solution on YOUR website!
1. (G • P) → K
2. E → Z
3. ~P → ~Z
4. G → (E v L) / (G • ~L) → K
| 5. G • ~L ACP
| 6. G 5, Simp.
| 7. ~L • G 5, Comm.
| 8. ~L 7, Simp.
| 7. E v L 4,6, MP
| 9. L v E 7, Comm
|10. E 9,8, DS
|11. Z 2,10 MP
|12. ~~Z → ~~P 3, Trans.
|13. Z → P 12, DN
|14. P 13,11, MP
|15. G • P 6,14, Conj.
|16. K 1,15, MP
17. (G • ~L) → K 5-16 CP
Edwin
|
|
|
