
Dal J. answered 11/22/14
Tutor
4.9
(64)
Expert Instructor in Complex Subjects and Public Speaking
Please post individual questions separately, to get the best chance of getting them answered.
I'm reviewing to see if I can find the proper form of response for your class. I'm not up on "natural deduction" as a sub-species of logic - I'm falling back on formal logic and talking my way through it.
If you can post a proof of any other problem so I can see how your professor wants it, symbolically, then I can rephrase my answers in a way that will help you the most.
Here, I'm going to use English so you can at least see how I'm thinking it through.
Let's look at item 4.
PROBLEM 4
The first equation translates to English this way :
If False is true it implies that (G OR H) must be true
G is True
Given the above, can you prove that F being true implies H is true?
(Initially I wrote a bunch of stuff here, but it's all irrelevant. If False is true, you can prove anything through a principle called ex falso quodlibet)
Assume F
H
Therefore F -> H

Dal J.
Okay, so here's the formal proof of PROBLEM 3 using a reasonable set of symbols for natural logic.
What we will do is assume one side of C & ~C is true, prove what follows, then assume the other side is true, prove what follows, and since it's the same thing either way, we're done. I've used the full name, since I have no idea what formal symbology you're using in class.
1 C V ~C given
2 C => ~B given
3 ~C => ~N given
4 assume C
5 ~B 2,4, modus ponens
6 ~B V ~N 5, disjunctive introduction of ~N
7 therefore C => (~B V ~N) 4,6, implication
8 assume ~C
9 ~N 3,8, modus ponens
10 ~B + ~N 9, disjunctive introduction of ~B
11 therefore ~C => (~B + ~N) 8,10, implication
12 (~B + ~N) 1,7,11, implication
11/22/14