Philosophy
posted by Anne .
a) Using long or short truth tables (symbolize as necessary and show tables) determine and state whether the following arguments are valid, briefly explaining your table; and b) if valid, demonstrate validity by deductions using Group I rules.
Arg
1. P>Q
2. ~P ^:~Q
Arg
If Peter is perceptive, then Quincy is a quack. Quincy, however, is not a quack. So Peter's not perceptive. (Hint: this is a valid argument)
This logical argument is valid under the following condition.
If and only if Peter is perceptive, then Quincy is a quack. Quincy, however, is not a quack. So Peter's not perceptive.
Truth table
PP QQ
T T
F F
I have no idea what you mean by group I rules.
Respond to this Question
Similar Questions

Philosophy
a) Using long or short truth tables (symbolize as necessary and show tables) determine and state whether the following arguments are valid, briefly explaining your table; and b) if valid, demonstrate validity by deductions using Group … 
Philosophy
a) Using long or short truth tables (symbolize as necessary and show tables) determine and state whether the following argument is valid, briefly explaining your table; and b) if valid, demonstrate validity by deductions using Group … 
math
Determine the validity of the next arguments by using Euler circles, then translate the statements into logical statements using the basic connectives, and using truth tables, determine the validity of the arguments. Compare your answers. … 
logic
determine the validity of the next arguments by using Euler circles, then translate the statements into logical statements using the basic connectives, and using truth tables, determine the validity of the arguments. Compare your answers. … 
math
Determine the validity of the next arguments by using Euler circles, then translate the statements into logical statements using basic connectives, and using truth tables, determine the validity of the arguments. Compare your answers. … 
Math
Determine the validity of the next arguments by using Euler circles, then translate the statements into logical statements using basic connectives, and using truth tables, determine the validity of the arguments. Compare your answers. … 
Phil103 Informal Logic
. If P is false, and Q is false, the truthvalue of "P ¡êQ" is (Points : 1) false. true. Cannot be determined. All of the above. 2. What is the truth value of the sentence "P & ~ P"? 
philosophy
Truth tables can determine which of the following? 
phi103
1. A conditional sentence with a false antecedent is always (Points : 1) true. false. Cannot be determined. not a sentence. 2. "Julie and Kurt got married and had a baby" is best symbolized as (Points : 1) M v B M & B M → B M … 
Descrete maths
Show that the following conditional statement is a tautology without using truth tables.[ p ^ ( p ! q )] ! q 8. Without the use of truth tables, determine whether ( : p ^ ( p ! q )) !: q is a tautology. show all your work