UNIT VI: SOLVED EXERCISES ON VALIDITY TESTS

INVALIDITY
Chair: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

INDICATIONS:
I invite you to review the solved exercises from the inference rules exercise guide and
Replacement, which are exercises taken from the book: 'Introduction to Logic', author of the book:
Irving Copi.
I. For each of the following arguments, state the inference rule by which the
the conclusion follows from the premises.
Exercise No. 5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
The⊃ (P⊃ Q) ·(Q⊃P)]
∴The⊃(P ≡ Q)

Exercise No. 10
ARGUMENTAL FORM
[C · (D ·∼E)] · [(C · D) ·∼E]
∴[(C · D) ·∼E] · [(C · D) ·∼E]

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

II. Each of the following arguments is a formal proof of the argument's validity
indicated. State the "justification" for each line that is not a premise.
Exercise No.5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
(Q v∼R) v S
2.∼Q v (R ·∼Q)
/ ∴R⊃ S
3. (∼Q v R) · (∼Q v∼Q)
4. (∼Q vs∼Q) · (∼Q v R)
5.∼Q v∼Q
6.∼Q
7. Q v (∼R vS)
8.∼R v S
9. R⊃ S

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Distribution in 2
Switching in 3
Simplification in 4
(∼Q v R
∴∼Q
Tautology in 5
Association in 1
Disjunctive Syllogism in 7 and 6
Material Implication in 8
∼R v S ≡ R⊃ S

1
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
UNIT VI: RESOLVED EXERCISES ON VALIDITY TESTS
INVALIDITY
Chairperson: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

III. For each of the following arguments, add exactly the two statements that
The premises are needed to produce a formal proof of validity. Construct a proof.
formal validity for each of the following arguments.
Exercise No.5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
∼K v (L⊃ M) / ∴(K · L)⊃ M
2. K⊃(L⊃ M)
3. (K · L)⊃ M
Exercise No. 10
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. Z⊃ A
2.∼A or B∴ Z⊃ B
3. A⊃B
4. Z⊃ B

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Implication in 2
Hypothetical syllogism in 1 and 3
Z⊃A
A⊃B
∴Z⊃B

IV. For each of the following arguments, add the three statements that are missing to the
premises to be able to produce a formal proof of validity. Construct a formal proof of
validity for each of the following Arguments
Exercise No.5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
[(K or L) or M] or N∴(N or K) or (L or M)
2. [K or (L or M)] or N
3. N v K v (L v M)
4. (N or K) or (L or M)

Exercise No. 10
ARGUMENTAL FORM
(Z v A) v B
2.∼A /∴Z v B
3. B v(Z v A)
4. (B or Z) or A
5.( B or Z)

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Switched to 1
Associative in 3
Disjunctive syllogism in 4 and 2
(B or Z) or A
∼A
∴Z v B
2

PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
UNIT VI: SOLVED EXERCISES OF VALIDITY TEST E
INVALIDITY
Chair: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

V. The exercises in this series correspond to frequent patterns of inference that are found in
more extensive validity tests. Familiarity with them will be useful in the subsequent work.
Build a formal validity proof for each of the following arguments.
Exercise No.5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. K⊃L
∴K⊃ (L v M)
2. K⊃(K.L)
3. K⊃(L)
4. K⊃(L v M)

Rules of Inference and Replacement

Absorption in 1
Simplification in 2
Addition in 3
L
∴(L v M)

it adds M

Exercise No. 10
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. Z⊃ A
2. From v A
∴A
3.∼ Z in A

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Implication in 1

4.∼( Z v A)

Double negation in 3
∼ From v∼A=∼( Z v A)

5.∼ Z .∼ A

Morgan's Law in 4
6.∼ Z

Simplification in 5

7. A

Disjunctive syllogism in 2 and 6

3
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
UNIT VI: SOLVED EXERCISES ON VALIDITY TEST E
INVALIDITY
Chair: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

VI. Build a formal validity proof for each of the following arguments.
Exercise No.5
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. [(M · N) · O]⊃ P
2. Q⊃ [(O · M) · N]
∴∼Q v P
3. O⊃ P
4. Q⊃ N
5.∼ O v P
6. ∼ Q vs N
7.∼ The v∼P
8.∼ Q v∼N
9.∼ O.∼P

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Simplification in 1
Simplification in 2
Material implication in 3
Material implication in 4
Double Negation in 5
Double Negation in 6
Morgan's Theorem in 7
∼ In∼P ≡∼( O v P)
∼( O v P) ≡∼ O.∼P

10.∼ Q . ∼N

Morgan's theorem in 8
∼ Q v∼N ≡∼( Q or N)
∼( Q v N) ≡∼ Q.∼N

11.∼P
12.∼Q
13.∼ Q.∼P

Simplification in 9
Simplification in 10
Conjunction in 11 and 12
∼P
∼Q
∴∼ Q.∼P14.∼( Q or P)
15.∼ Q v P

Morgan's theorem in 13
Double negation in 14
∼( Q v P) ≡∼Q v∼P
∼(∼P) ≡ P

4
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
UNIT VI: SOLVED EXERCISES OF VALIDITY TEST E
INVALIDITY
Department: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

Exercise No. 10
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. [H v (Iv J)]⊃ (K⊃ J)
2. L⊃ [I v (J v H)]
∴(L · K)⊃ J
3. L⊃ [H v (I v J)]
4. (K⊃ J) ⊃ L

5. L⊃(K⊃ J)
6. (L⊃K)⊃ J
7. (L.K)⊃ J

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Associativity in 2
Hypothetical syllogism in 1 and 3
[H v (Iv J)]⊃ (K ⊃ J)
L⊃ [H or (I or J)]
∴ (K⊃ ⊃ L
Switched at 4
Associate in 5
Export in 6
(L⊃K)⊃ J ≡ (L.K)⊃ J

VII. Build a validity test for each of the following arguments, using in
each case the suggested notation.
5. If the litmus paper turns red, then the solution is an oxide. Then, if the paper turns
red, then either the solution is an oxide or something is wrong. (R, A, W)
Solution
1st Step: Create the Notation:
Litmus paper turns red
A: the solution is an oxide
W: there is something wrong
2nd Step: Building the argument:
R⊃A
R
∴A.W
3rd Step: Build a formal proof of validity for the argument:
ARGUMENTAL FORM
1. R⊃A
2. R
∴A.W
3. A

4. A.W

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

Modus Ponens in 1 and 2

PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
EQUIVALENCE LAWS
Now, there are arguments that demand the application
of other laws, such as the so-called laws of equivalence,
the which have as main connection a
equivalence (biconditional) which indicates that the:
statements are equivalent. The laws of equivalence
the most well-known are:
1.

Switching (CONM)

2.

Double Negation (DN)

3.

De Morgan (DM)

4.

Association (ASOC)

5.

Distribution (DISTR)

6.

Contraposition (CONTR)
LAW OF DOUBLE NEGATION
(DN)
The law of double negation states that a statement
double negation is equivalent to a
affirmation.
~~p ≡ p
Example:
It is not true that I am not part of the group of
theater.
I am part of the theater group.
LAW OF COMMUTATION
(CONM)
This law allows us to change the location of the
propositions of a conjunction or of a
disjunction
(p ∧ q) ≡ (q ∧ p)

(p v q)≡(q v p)

Example:
Manuel studies Early Childhood Education and works in a
photocopier.
Manuel works in a photocopy shop and studies
Early Education.
MORGAN'S LAW (DM)
This law allows changing the connections of the
disjunction and conjunction, as well as of the
negation. This law is expressed as follows:
~(p and q) is logically equivalent to ~p or ~q

~(p ∧ q) ≡ ~p ∧ ~q
Example:
It's while they bought me chocolates and that I
they bought a birthday gift.
They didn't buy me chocolates and they didn't buy me a
birthday gift.
LAW OF CONTRAPOSITION
(CONTR)
This law consists of contrasting the antecedent with
the consequent, modifying the value of truth
of the propositions linked by the conditional. The law
it is expressed as follows:
p q is equivalent to not q ~p
Example:
If they pay the phone bill then we will have
line.
If they don't pay the phone bill then no
we will have a line.
LAW OF ASSOCIATION
(ASOC)
This law consists of conjunction or disjunction
of two statements and allows to group them in such a way
indistinct without alternating its truth value; it is expressed of the
next way:

(p ^ q) ^ r ≡ p ^ (q ^ r)
(p or q) or r is equivalent to p or (q or r)

Example:
Letcia falls asleep if and only if she arrives late to class.
it's enough that it's enough for the teacher not to
will let in.
Letcia falls asleep, it's enough for it to be enough.
she would be late to class if and only if the teacher does not
will let in.
LAW OF DISTRIBUTION
(DISTR)
This law also applies to the connection of the conjunction.
and the disjunction. The statements connected by these
connections may remain distributed, achieving this way
to have an equivalence. Its formula is expressed as
next way:
p ^ (q ^ r) ≡ (p ^ q) ^ (p ^ r)
p v (q v r) ≡ (p v q) v (p v r)
Example:
Flores bought a pair of pants or a couple of blouses and ate.
an ice cream.
Flores bought a pair of pants or a couple of blouses or ate.
an ice cream.
UNIT VI: SOLVED EXERCISES OF VALIDITY TEST E
INVALIDITY
Chair: Ing. CRISTELA FUENTES

10. If the laws are good and their enforcement is strict, crime will decrease. If compliance
strict enforcement of the law reduces crime, so our problem is of a practical nature. The
Laws are good, then our problem is of a practical nature. (B, E, D, P).
Solution:
1st Step: Create the Notation:
laws are good
Compliance is strict
The crime will decrease.
P: our problem is of a practical nature
2nd Step: Building the Argument:
(B.E)⊃D
(E.D)⊃ P
∴B⊃P
Build a formal proof of validity for the argument:
ARGUMENTAL FORM

RULES OF INFERENCE AND REPLACEMENT

1. (B.E)⊃D
2. (E.D)⊃ P
∴ B⊃P
3. (B)⊃D
4. (D)⊃ P
5. B⊃P

Simplification in 1
(B.E)
∴B
Simplification in 2
(E.D)
∴D
Hypothetical syllogism in 3 and 4
(B)⊃D
(D)⊃ P
∴ B⊃P

6
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
FRANCISCO GAVIDIA UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND SYSTEMS
Exercises VALIDITY AND INVALIDITY TEST
Cycle 02- 2014
Propositional Logic
Mathematical Logic
VIRTUAL
Group: 02V
Professor: Ing. María Cristela Fuentes
[email protected]
Classroom:
Student
Martnez Martnez
Ronald Humberto

Last names
Names
Company
Career Code:
Meat UFG: MM101612
11/26/2014
Rating:
INDICATION: Solve the exercises from the textbook Introduction to Logic by Irving Copi

I. For each of the following arguments, state the rule of inference by which the
the conclusion follows from the premises.
Arguments
Rules used
[I (J K) (J I)

(I · J) K] · (J I)

Material equivalence

(R v S) ( R v S)

( R ( R v S)

De Morgan's theorem
II. Each of the following arguments is a formal proof of the validity of the argument
indicated. State the 'justification' for each line that is not a premise.
Arguments
Rules used to justify each line of the validity test (in red)
(M or N) (O · P)
2. O / M

3. Ov P
4. (O · P)
5. (M v N)
6. M N
7. M

Morgan 1 2
Morgan 3
Morgan 1
Morgan 5
MP6

(D · E) F
2. F v (G · H)
3. D E / D G

4. (D E) · (E D)
5. D E
6. D (D · E)
7. D F
(F or G) and (F or H)
9. F v G

Constructive Dilemma 1
Modus ponens 4
Absorption 4 5
Modus tollens 3 1
Distribution 2
Simplification 8

III. For each of the following arguments, add exactly the two statements that make
missing the premises to produce a formal proof of validity. Build a formal proof of
validity for each of the following arguments.
Arguments
Rules used to justify the two added lines of the validity test
E / (E or F) and (E or G)

1 E / (E and F) · (E and G) E /
2 E v (f .G) 1 disn
3 (E or F) . (E or G) 2 disn
Q [R (S T)]
Q (Q · R) / Q (S T)

1 Q [R (S T)] 1 exp
2 Q (Q · R) / Q (S T) 2 3 S H
3 [(Q. R) (S R) ]
4 Q(S R)

IV. For each of the following arguments, add the three statements that are missing.
premises to be able to produce a formal proof of validity. Constructing a formal proof of
validate each of the following arguments.
Arguments
Rules used to justify the three added lines of the validity test
(Z or A) or B
A/ ZvB

1 (Z v A) v B
2 A / Z v B 1 2 SD
3 Z 2 1 AB
4 B 4 3 AD
5. Z B
Q [R (S T)]
Q (Q · R) / Q (S T)

1 Q [R (S T)]
2 Q (Q · R) / Q (S T)
3 [Q .R ) (S) T] 1 EXP
4 Q 2 MP
Q (S T) 2 3 4 3 SH
V. The exercises in this series correspond to frequent patterns of inference found in
more extensive validity tests. Familiarity with them will be useful in subsequent work.
Build a formal validity proof for each of the following arguments.
Arguments
Rules that justify the validity test
E (F G)
F (E G)

1 E (F G)
F (E G)
2 [ ( E. F) G ] EXP 1
3 (F.E) COM 2
4 F (E G) EXP 3 2
T U
T V / T (U · V)

1T U
2 T V / T (U · V)
3 V 1 2 MP
4 V 2 1 MP
5(U · V) 3 4 CONJ
6 T1 3 MP
7 T ( U.V) 6 5 MP
VI. Build a formal proof of validity for each of the following arguments.
Arguments
Rules that justify the validity test
(M · N) · O P
Q (O · M) · N
Q or P

1 [(M · N) · O] P
2 Q [(O · M) · N
QvP
3 O P 1 SIMPLE
4 O N 2 SIMPL
5 In P 3 IMPLICATE
6 In N 4 IMPLICATE
7 In P 5 DOUBLE NEGATION
8 Q v N 6 DOUBLE NEGATION
9 O. P 7 MORGAN
10 Q. N 8 MORGAN
11 P 9 SIMPLE
12 Q 10 SIMPL
13 Q. P 11 12 CONJ
14 (Q or P) 13 MORGAN
15 Q v P DOUBLE NEGATION

M N
M (N O)
M O
1M N
2 M (N O)
M O
3 N 1 2 MP
4 (M.N) O 2 EXP
5 N The 4 EXP
6 M 4 SIMP
7 O 5 3 MP
8 (M.O) 6 7 CONJ
9 M THE 8 MATERIAL EQUIVALENCE

VII. Build a validity test for each of the following arguments, using in each
in case of the suggested notation.

You can only have many friends if you respect them as individuals. If you respect them as individuals,
You can't expect everyone to behave the same way. He has many friends. Then,
do not expect everyone to behave the same way. (A, R, E)

1 A And having many friends

5 ~R 2 4 MP
If the cashier or the accountant had pressed the alarm button, the vault would have closed.
automatically and the police would have arrived in three minutes. If the police had arrived in three
Minutes later, I could have caught up to the thieves' car, then the cashier didn't press the button.
of alarm. (T, C, V, P, O)

1 [ (C v O) P].T
2TC v C
3 (C or O) P 1 SIMP
4 CvO 3 1 MP
5 (T (C or O) 2 4 CONJ
6 CvO 5 SIMP
7 ~ C 6 SD
The cashier would have pressed the alarm button
The accountant would have pressed the alarm button.
The vault closes automatically
The police will arrive in 3 minutes.
To reach the thieves' car