Question 1206424:  Premise: 
1. 
(K ∨ L) ⊃ (M • N) 
2. 
(N ∨ O) ⊃ (P • ~K) 
Conclusion: 
~K 
Use either indirect proof or conditional proof (or both) and the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusion of the following symbolized argument.  
 Answer by math_tutor2020(3817)      (Show Source): 
You can  put this solution on YOUR website!  
Here are the Rules of Inference that you should have on a reference sheet or memorized.
 
 
I'll do an indirect proof. This is also known as a proof by contradiction. 
The idea is to assume the opposite of the conclusion. Then show that assumption leads to a contradiction; which therefore must mean the original conclusion is indeed the case.
 
 
I'll use the ampersand & in place of the dot. 
I'll use the arrow -> in place of the horseshoe.  
| Number | Statement | Line(s) Used | Reason |  | 1 |  | (K v L) -> (M & N) |  |  |  | 2 |  | (N v O) -> (P & ~K) |  |  |  | :. |  | ~K |  |  |   | 3 | ~(~K) |  | Assumption for Indirect Proof |   | 4 | K | 3 | Double Negation |   | 5 | K v L | 4 | Addition |   | 6 | M & N | 1,5 | Modus Ponens |   | 7 | N | 6 | Simplification |   | 8 | N v O | 7 | Addition |   | 9 | P & ~K | 2,8 | Modus Ponens |   | 10 | ~K | 9 | Simplification |   | 11 | K & ~K | 4,10 | Conjunction |  | 12 |  | ~K | 3 - 11 | Indirect Proof |  
  
The original conclusion is ~K
 
 
Line 3 is where we assume the opposite of that conclusion. 
Following the logic of lines 3 to 11, we arrive at K & ~K which is a contradiction. So that allows us to conclude ~K at the end. 
 
  | 
 
  
 
 |   
 
 |