0

# Proof Help

Wed 22 Nov, 2017 02:41 pm
I am in an intro logic class and need some help figuring out a couple proofs. Te first is:
1. (∃xFx & ¬Ws) → ∀x(Tx → Wx)
2. ¬∃xLx → ¬(Ft →Ws)
∴ ∀x(¬Lx) → ∀x(Tx → Wx)

The second is:
1. (Sc v Dc) → ∀xAx
. (¬Dc v Jc) → ∀xNx
∴ Ac v Nc

Any help I could get with at least getting them started is appreciated, thank you!
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,007 • Replies: 1
No top replies

carpenters

1
Fri 24 Nov, 2017 04:34 pm
@Guy5,
For the first one, assume the antecedent of the conclusion. Then use the Quantifier Shift sequent ∀x(¬Lx) → ¬∃xLx. Then using modus ponens on 2, you get ¬(Ft →Ws). The latter is the same as (Ft & ¬Ws). From Ft you can deduce ∃xFx by existential introduction. And from there using modus ponens on 1, you get the conseqent of the conclusion. Applying implication introduction is straightforward, and you get the conclusion.

For the second one, assume the negation of the conclusion in an reductio ad absurdum strategy.

So, ¬ (Ac v Nc), which is the same as (¬Ac & ¬Nc) by DeMorgan theorem. From ¬Ac, deduce ∃x¬Ax. Apply quantifier shift and you get ¬∀xAx. The same with the other conjunct, and you get ¬∀xNx. Using these two, apply modus tollens to the two premises. to get ¬(Sc v Dc) and ¬(¬Dc v Jc) respectively. Using DeMorgan you get (¬Sc & ¬Dc) and (Dc & ¬Jc). Clearly, there is a contradiction with Dc and ¬Dc. You can then with this contradiction justify the negation of the original assumption, i.e. ¬(Ac v Nc). So you then arrive at the conclusion (Ac v Nc).
0 Replies

### Related Topics

Secrets of the New A2K - Discussion by jespah
Malformed Topics! - Discussion by jespah
Why do guys with girlfriends look at me? - Question by jibberjabber
Cycloptichorn is getting married - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
How you can help us with the new site - Discussion by Craven de Kere
Online dating advice - Question by Sunshine20
Cryptic quiz - Pls help - Question by garrmarr
cryptic bird quiz - Question by garrmarr
Life Advice - Question by oaksi567

1. Forums
2. » Proof Help