Proof EXERCISES

I. For the following arguments, provide the justification for

each line that is not a premise.

*1. 1.(a.b))c 2. 1. d)a

2. a)b 2. d.-b
3. (a)c))-d 3. a)(bvc) /c
4. dve /e ---------------
------------- 4. d
5. a)(a.b) 5. a
6. a)c 6. bvc
7. -d 7. -b
8. e 8. c

3. 1. -b 4. 1. (avb))-(a.c)
2. -a)b 2. a.b
3. a)(-c.-d) 3. a)c /-a
4. -c)e /a.e --------------
---------------- 4 a
5. a 5. avb
6. -c.-d 6. -(a.c)
7. -c 7. a)(a.c)
8 e 8. -a
9. a.e

*5. 1. a)(b)c) 6. 1. -b)d

2. a)(e)f) 2. -d)a
3. bve 3. (a.b))c
4. a.d /cvf 4. -d.e /c
-------------- -----------m--
5. a 5. -d
6. b)c 6. a
7. e)f 7. b
8. (b)c).(e)f) 8. a.b
9. cvf 9. c

7. 1. a)b 8. 1. (bve))f
2. -a)c 2. a)b
3. -(a.b) 3. avc
4. -cv(d.e) /d 4. c)e
---------------- 5. a /f.a
5. a)(a.b) ------------
6. -a 6. (a)b).((c)e)
7. c 7. bve
8. d.e 8. f
9. d 9. f.a
 -2-

9. 1. (a.b))c *10. 1. b)[(c)b)v(d.e)]

2. (c.a))e 2. avb
3. a)b 3. -a
4. -evf 4. e)f
5. a /f 5. -(d.e)
----------- 6. cve /bvf
6. a)(a.b) ---------------
7. a)c 7. b
8. c 8. (c)b)v(d.e)
9. c.a 9. (c)b)
10. e 10. (c)b).(e)f)
11. f 11. bvf

II. Construct a formal proof of validity for each of the follow-

ing arguments.

1. 1. av-(bvc) 2. 1. a)(b)c)
2. b 2. a
3. a)(c)d) 3. b
4. -d /-c 4. -cva /a

3. 1. a.b *4. 1. a)b

2. b)(e.f) 2. (a.b))(cvd)
3. -evc 3. (cvd))-e
4. c)d /d 4. (a)-e))f /f

5. 1. a)b *6. 1. (a)b))(b)c)

2. a 2. cv(a)b)
3. b)(c.e) 3. -c /a
4. -cve /e

7. 1. (a.b))c 8. 1. a)b
2. e)f 2. (a.b))c
3. -c 3. e)f
4. (a.b)ve /fvg 4. ave /cvf

*9. 1. a)b 10. 1. c)e

2. c)d 2. -e
3. avc 3. a)(bvc)
4. (bvd))-e 4. a /b
5. evf /f
 -3-

III. Construct a formal proof for the following arguments.

Symbolise the statements using the suggested letters.

1. Either the security problem affects the modernisation of

the Armed Forces or the economic condition reduces the possibili
ty of modernisation. The government and the business sectors
will discuss priority issues if the economic condition reduces
the possibility of modernisation. The security problem will
not affect the modernisation of the Armed Forces. Hence, the
government will discuss priority issues. [s: security problem
affects modernisation; e: economic condition reduces the
possibility of modernisation; g: government will discuss
priority issues; b: business sectors will discuss priority
issues].

2. Both water and earth are primal substances in the universe.

If either water or air is the primal substance in the
universe, then the ancient Greek philosophers had an advanced
cosmology. Therefore, the ancient Greek philosophers had an
advanced cosmology. [w: water is the primal substance; a: air is
the primal substance; e: earth is the primal substance; g: Greek
philosophy had an advanced cosmology].

3. Darwin postulated the theory of evolution; and so did

Wallace. If Darwin postulated the theory of evolution, then
Spencer advanced the idea of the survival of the fittest. If
either Spencer advanced the idea of the survival of the fittest
or that Wallace postulated the theory of evolution, then Empedo
cles was its ancient founder. Hence, either Empedocles was its
ancient founder or that Wallace postulated the theory of evolu
ton. [ d: Darwin postulated the theory of evolution; w: Wallace
postulated the theory of evolution; s: Spencer advanced the idea
of the survival of the fittest; e: Empedocles was its ancient
founder].

4. Zeno will study his lesson only if he will earn a good

grade. If either Zeno will earn a good grade or will pass the
course, then he will graduate. Zeno will pass the course if he
will bribe the teacher. Either Zeno will study his lesson or he
will bribe the teacher. But Zeno will study his lesson or else
he will not graduate. So, either Zeno will study his lesson or
he will forget about studying. [ s: Zeno will study his lesson;
e: he will earn a good grade; c: he will pass the course; g: he
will graduate; b: he will bribe the teacher; f: he will forget
about studying].
 -4-

5. Pythagoras is telling the truth provided that "all things

are numbers." If all things are numbers implies that mathematics
begins with Pythagoras, then either science is superior to
metaphysics or that (as Russell says) "mathematics is..the
chief source of the belief in eternal truth." If all things are
numbers and Pythagoras is telling the truth, then mathematics
begins with Pythagoras. But science is not superior to metaphy-
sics. Therefore, mathematics is..the chief course of the belief
in eternal truth. [n: all things are numbers; t: Pythagoras
is telling the truth; m: mathematics begins with Pythagoras; s:
science is superior to metaphysics; e: mathematics is the chief
source of the belief in eternal truth].

IV. State the Rule of Replacement used for each of the following
arguments.

*1. a)-(b.c) 2. (x.y))(o.z)

/a)(-bv-c) /-(o.z))-(x.y)

3. (--q)r)v(s.t) 4. (r.y)v(r.y)
/(q)r)v(s.t) /r.y

*5. (yvz))r 6. (f.g))(w.x)

/(yvz))[(yvz).r] /-(f.g)v(w.x)

7. (m)n)v(r:s) 8. [d.(e.f)])(gvh)
/(m)n)v[r.s)v(-r.-s)] /[(d.e).f])(gvh)

9. (i)j)v(k.l) *10. [o.(pvq)]v(r.s)

/(k.l)v(i)j) /[(o.p)v(o.q)]v(r.s)

V. Provide the justification for the proofs for each of the

following partially constructed arguments.

1. 1. (p.q))r 2. 1. a)-(bvc)
2. p 2. (-av-b))c / c
3. (q)r))s ------------------
4. -sv(t)m) /-tvm 3. --(bvc))-a
------------------- 4. (bvc))-a
5. p)(q)r) 5. -(bvc)v-a
6. q)r 6. (-b.-c)v-a
7. s 7. -av(-b.-c)
8. --s 8. (-av-b).(-av-c)
9. t)m 9. -av-b
10. -tvm 10. c
 -5-

*3. 1. a)b 4. 1. e:b

2. b)(-c.d) 2. a)-e
3. d)e 3. c:a
4. -e /-a 4. b /-c
------------ --------------
5. a)(-c.d) 5. (e)b).(b)e)
6. -av(-c.d) 6. b)e
7. (-av-c).(-avd) 7. (c)a).(a)c)
8. -avd 8. c)a
9. dv-a 9. e
10. -d 10. --e)-a
11. -a 11. -a)-c
12. --e)-c
13. e)-c
14. -c

5.1.(avb))c *6. 1. (a.b))(c.d)

2. b /c 2. -d /b)-a
---------- ----------------
3. -(avb)vc 3. -(a.b)v(c.d)
4. (-a.-b)vc 4. (-av-b)v(c.d)
5. cv(-a.-b) 5. 5.[(-av-b)vc].[(-av-b)vd]
6. (cv-a).(cv-b) 6. (-av-b)vd
7. cv-b 7. -av-b
8. -c)-b 8. --a)-b
9. --b)--c 9. a)-b
10. b)c 10. --b)-a
11. c 11. b)-a

7. 1. -avb 8. 1. (avb))c
2. b)(c.d) 2. (cv-b))a /a
3. -cv-d /-a ---------------
--------------- 3. -c)-(avb)
4. a)b 4. -c)(-a.-b)
5. a)(c.d) 5. cv(-a.-b)
6. -(c.d))-a 6. (cv-a).(cv-b)
7. -(c.d) 7. (cv-b).(cv-a)
8. -a 8. cv-b
9. a

*9. 1. a)-(-b)-c) 10. 1. a)(b.c)

2. -b)(c)-e) /a)-e 2. (-avb))(-c)-d) /d)c
-------------------- ----------------------
3. a)-(--bv-c) 3. -av(b.c)
4. a)-(bv-c) 4. (-avb).(-avc)
 -6-

5. --bv(c)-e) 5. (-avb)
6. bv(-cv-e) 6. -c)-d
7. (bv-c)v-e 7. --d)--c
8. -(bv-c))-e 8. d)c
9. a)-e

VI. Construct a formal proof of validity for each of the follow-

ing arguments.

*1. 1. (MvT)vS 2. 1. X.(YvZ)

2. -M /TvS 2. -(X.Z)
3. (Y.X))W /W

3. 1. M)N *4. 1. O)(P)Q)

2. -O)-(M.N) 2. -O)(R.S)
3. (M)O)R /R 3. P.-Q /R.S

5. 1. (S)T).(T)S) 6. 1.-F)(G.H)
2. (S:T))(-X)-Y) /YvX 2. -(H.G) /FvH

*7. 1. (W.X))Y 8. 1. (A.B))C

2. (W)Y))Z 2. Bv-C /-A
3. -Z /-X

VII. Symbolise and construct a formal proof of validity.

1. If "Women as a sex are more naturally akin to piety,"

(says Pythagoras), then women are not Reasonable beings. But
women are Reasonable beings. Therefore, it is not the case that
Women as a sex are more naturally akin to piety. (W,R)

2. There will be Peace in Mindanao if and only if the Rebels

will give up their arms. But neither Peace nor a fruitful Nego
tiation has been so far achieved. Consequently, the Rebels will
not give up their arms. (P,R,N)

3. It is not the case that both Heraclitus and Parmenides

believed that nothing changes. Parmenides believed that nothing
changes. Hence, Heraclitus does not believe that nothing changes.
(H,P)
 -7-

s23 EXERCISES

I. Construct a conditional proof of validity and then attempt

to do it without the use of conditional proof.

1. 1. d)-f *2. 1. (n.o))p

2. fv(g.h) /d)g 2. (-p)-o))q /n)q

3. 1. a)b 4. 1. x)-(-y)-z)
2. a)(b)c) /a)c 2. -y)(z)-w) /x)-w

5. 1. e)(f.g) *6. 1. r)(y)z)

2. (fvs))h 2. r)(w)-m)
3. (-evh)k /k 3. m)(yvw) /r)(m)z)

s24. INDIRECT PROOF OF VALIDITY

The method of indirect proof (IP) is a form of conditional

proof in a sense that a provisional assumption is still
expressed or stated, though what is assumed here is the contra
diction or the negation of the conclusion of the argument. The
idea behind this method is to `reduce to absurdity'(hence the name
reductio ad absurdum proof) the conclusion of the argument
thereby making it false. A false conclusion implies invalidity
of the argument granting the truth of all its premises. So this
assumption of falsity must necessarily lead to a contradiction in
order to establish the validity of the argument(for a valid
argument asserts no contradiction). In other words, the presence
of a contradiction in the body of the proof implies validity
since we have assumed the falsity of the conclusion. This is to
say further that a valid argument cannot have a logically
false conclusion.

The method of indirect proof is illustrated in the following

example:

1. p)q
2. r)s
3. pvr
4. (qvs))-t
5. tvw /w
----------------
6. -w IP
7. (p)q).(r)s) 1,2 CJ
8. qvs 7,3 CD
9. -t 4,8 MP
10. w 5,9 DS
11. w.-w 10,6 CJ
12. w 6-11 IP
 -8-

As can be observed, the negation of the conclusion at the begin

ning of the proof leads to a self-contradiction (line 11) which
establishes the validity of the argument. This means that a
falsification of a valid argument's conclusion will be falsified,
negated, or contradicted. Whenever the method of indirect proof
is used, there will always be a self-contradictory statement in
the body of the proof. It is not necessary, however, to have a
contradiction of the original conclusion as in the above example,
for any contradiction inferred is sufficient to show the validity
of the argument as in the example below:

1. a.b
2. b)(e.f)
3. -evc
4. c)d /d
------------
5. -d IP
6. -c 4,5 MT
7. -e 3,6 DS
8. b 1 SP
9. e.f 2,8 MP
10. e 9 SP
11. e.-e 7,10 CJ
12. d 5-11 IP

In this particular case, the contradiction is shown in line 11.

For any proof of validity by the method of indirect proof, once
we obtained this contradictory line, the indirect proof
sequence is complete.

In addition to using these methods independently of each other,

both of them can be used in a single proof as in the following
example:

1. r)x
2. (r.x))z /r)z
-------------------
3. r /z CP
4. -z IP
5. x 1,3 MP
6. r.x 3,5 CJ
7. z 2,6 MP
8. r)z 3,7 CP
 -9-

s24 EXERCISES

I. Construct an indirect proof of validity.

*1. 1. (f.e))h 2. 1. l)m

2. f)e 2. l.-n
3. (f)h))-k 3. m)(nvo) /o
4. kvl /l

3. 1. -s 4. 1. (svb))-(s.c)
2. -r)s 2. s.b
3. r)(-t.-w) 3. s)c /-s
4. -t)x /x

*5. 1. x)y 6. 1. m)n

2. z)w 2. -n
3. xvz 3. o)(pvm)
4. (yvw))-t 4. o /p
5. tvr /r

7. 1. -b)d 8. 1. e)k
2. -d)a 2. -e)f
3. (a.b))c 3. -(e.k)
4. -d.e /c 4. -fv(y.e) /y

*9. 1. a.b 10. 1. a)b

2. b)(e.f) 2. (a.b))(cvd)
3. -evc 3. (cvd))-e
4. c)d /d 4. (a)-e))f /f