Question 1208943: prove the argument is valid using the method of natural deduction:
1. (~N wedge R) horseshoe B
2. A wedge ~(M horseshoe N) / therefore A horsehoe B
Answer by math_tutor2020(3817)   (Show Source):
You can put this solution on YOUR website!
The argument is invalid.
An invalid argument happens when all true premises lead to a false conclusion.
Let's make the conclusion A --> B to be false.
I'm using an arrow instead of a horseshoe.
Here is the truth table for A --> B
Refer to this lesson for more info.
We see that A --> B is false when A is true leads to B being false.
A = true = T
B = false = F
A --> B is false
Since A is true, it means the 2nd premise A v ~(M --> N) is also true. The truth value of the portion ~(M --> N) won't affect the truth value of the entire premise.
B is false, so the 1st premise is of the template (~N v R) --> F
To make sure this premise is true, we just need the ~N v R portion to be false. If it was true then the entire premise would be false.
~N v R is false only when both ~N is false and R is false.
~N being false means N is true.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recap:
If we have these truth values,
A = T
B = F
M = either T or F. Doesn't matter.
N = T
R = F
then we'll have
premise 1: (~N v R) --> B becomes (~T v F) --> F simplifies to T
premise 2: A v ~(M --> N) becomes T v ~(T --> T) simplifies to T
conclusion: A --> B becomes T --> F then turns into F
In short,
premise 1 = true
premise 2 = true
conclusion = false
We have shown that the premises are all true, but they lead to a false conclusion.
Therefore the argument is invalid. Your teacher made a typo somewhere.
|
|
|
