New Semester Started Get 50% OFF Study Help! --h --m --s Claim Now

Question Answers

Textbooks

Find textbooks, questions and answers

Oops, something went wrong!

Change your search query and then try again

Result Not Found

Books FREE
Study Help
Tutors
AI Study Planner NEW
Sell Books

Search
Sign In
Register

study help
business
logic functions and equations

A Concise Introduction To Logic 11th Edition Patrick J. Hurley - Solutions

★16. Christopher invited some of his friends. Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
15. Sylvia invited only her friends. (Ixy: x invited y; Fxy: x is a friend of y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
14. Jones can drive any car in the lot. Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
★13. Peterson can drive some of the cars in the lot. (Dxy: x can drive y; Cx: x is a car;Lx: x is in the lot) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
12. Th e Clark Corporation advertises everything it produces. (Axy: x advertises y;Pxy: x produces y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
11. The Royal Hotel serves only good drinks. (Sxy: x serves y; Gx: x is good;Dx:x is a drink) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
★10. Some people can sell anything. Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
9. No person can sell everything. Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
8. Some people cannot sell anything. Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
★7. Every person can sell something or other. (Px: x is a person; Sxy: x can sell y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
6. Dr. Nelson teaches a few morons. (Txy: x teaches y; Mx: x is a moron) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
5. Dr. Jordan teaches only geniuses. (Txy: x teaches y; Gx: x is a genius) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
★4. If James has any friends, then Marlene is one of them. (Fxy: x is a friend of y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
3. James is a friend of either Ellen or Connie. (Fxy: x is a friend of y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
2. Whoever reads Paradise Lost is educated. (Rxy: x reads y; Ex: x is educated) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
★1. Charmaine read Paradise Lost. (Rxy: x read y) Translate the following statements into symbolic form.
5. All cellists and violinists are members of the string section. Some violinists are not cellists. Also, some cellists are not violinists. Th erefore, everyone is a member of the string section. (C, V, M) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use either the counterexample
★4. All tympanists are haughty. If some tympanists are haughty, then some percussionists are overbearing. Th erefore, all tympanists are overbearing. (T, H, P, O) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use either the counterexample method or the fi nite universe method to
3. If there are any oboists, there are some bassoonists. If there are any clarinetists, there are some fl utists. Amelia is both an oboist and a clarinetist. Th erefore, some bassoonists are fl utists. (O, B, C, F) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use either the
2. Pianists and harpsichordists are meticulous. Alfred Brendel is a pianist.Th erefore, everyone is meticulous. (P, H, M) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use either the counterexample method or the fi nite universe method to prove that each is invalid.
1. Violinists who play well are accomplished musicians. Th ere are some violinists in the orchestra. Th erefore, some musicians are accomplished. (V, P, A, M, O) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use either the counterexample method or the fi nite universe method to prove
(10) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • Bx)2. (∃x)(∼Ax • ∼Bx) / (x)(Ax ≡ Bx)
(9) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • ∼Bx)2. (∃x)(Bx • ∼Ax) / (x)(Ax ∨ Bx)
(8) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • Bx) ≡ (∃x)Cx 2. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx) / (x)Ax ≡ (∃x)Cx
(7) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (∃x)Bx ⊃ (∃x)Cx / (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx)
(6) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)Ax 2. (∃x)Bx / (∃x)(Ax • Bx)
(5) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx ∨ Cx)]2. (∃x)Ax / (∃x)Bx
(4) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (∃x)Ax / (x)Bx
(3) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)Ax ∨ (∃x)Bx 2. (∃x)Ax / (∃x)Bx
(2) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)(Ax ∨ Bx)2. ∼An / (x)Bx
(1) Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. Use the fi nite universe method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.(x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / (x)(Bx ⊃ Cx)
(10) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • Bx)2. (∃x)(Cx • ∼Bx)3. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / (∃x)[(Cx • Bx) • ∼Ax]
(9) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)[(Ax • Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. (x)[(Ax • Cx) ⊃ Dx] / (x)[(Ax • Dx) ⊃ Cx]
(8) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)[(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. (x)[(Cx • Dx) ⊃ Ex] / (x)(Ax ⊃ Ex)
(7) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)Ax 2. (∃x)Bx 3. (x)(Ax ⊃ ∼Cx) / (∃x)(Bx • ∼Cx)
(6) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx ∨ Cx)]2. (x)[(Bx • Cx) ⊃ Dx] / (x)(Ax ⊃ Dx)
(5) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)[Ax ∨ (Bx ∨ Cx)] / (x)Ax ∨ [(x)Bx ∨ (x)Cx]
(4) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • Bx)2. (∃x)(Ax • Cx) / (∃x)[Ax • (Bx • Cx)]
(3) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. Bc / Ac
(2) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (∃x)(Ax • Bx)2. (x)(Cx ⊃ Ax) / (∃x)(Cx • Bx)
(1) Use the counterexample method to prove that the following symbolized arguments are invalid.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (x)(Ax ⊃ ∼Cx) / (x)(Cx ⊃ Bx)
★10. Either some governors are present or some ambassadors are present. If anyone is present, then some ambassadors are clever diplomats. Th erefore, some diplomats are clever. (G, P, A, C, D) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof to derive
9. Either no senators are present or no representatives are present. Furthermore, either some senators are present or no women are present. Th erefore, none of the representatives who are present are women. (S, P, R, W) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or
8. If there are any voters, then all politicians are astute. If there are any politicians, then whoever is astute is clever. Th erefore, if there are any voters, then all politicians are clever. (V, P, A, C) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect
★7. If there are any consuls, then all ambassadors are satisfi ed diplomats. If no consuls are ambassadors, then some diplomats are satisfi ed. Th erefore, some diplomats are satisfi ed. (C, A, S, D) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof to
6. If there are any senators, then some employees are well paid. If there is anyone who is either an employee or a volunteer, then there are some legislative assistants.Either there are some volunteers or there are some senators. Th erefore, there are some legislative assistants. (S, E, W, V, L)
5. All ambassadors are diplomats. Furthermore, all experienced ambassadors are cautious, and all cautious diplomats have foresight. Th erefore, all experienced ambassadors have foresight. (A, D, E, C, F) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof
★4. All secretaries and undersecretaries are intelligent and cautious. All those who are cautious or vigilant are restrained and austere. Th erefore, all secretaries are austere. (S, U, I, C, V, R, A) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof to
3. If all judges are wise, then some attorneys are rewarded. Furthermore, if there are any judges who are not wise, then some attorneys are rewarded. Th erefore, some attorneys are rewarded. (J, W, A, R) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof
2. All senators are well liked. Also, if there are any well-liked senators, then O’Brien is a voter. Th erefore, if there are any senators, then O’Brien is a voter.(S, W, V) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof to derive the conclusion of
1. All ambassadors are wealthy. Furthermore, all Republicans are clever. Th erefore, all Republican ambassadors are clever and wealthy. (A, W, R, C) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use conditional or indirect proof to derive the conclusion of each.
(21) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)(Ax ∨ Bx)2. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (x)(Cx ⊃ Bx)3. (∃x)Cx / (∃x)Bx
(20) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx • Cx)]2. (x)[Dx ⊃ (Ex • Fx)] / (x)(Cx ⊃ Dx) ⊃ (x)(Ax ⊃ Fx)
(19) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)[Bx ⊃ (Cx • Dx)] / (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx) ⊃ (x)(Ax ⊃ Dx)
(18) 1. (x)(Ax ≡ Bx)2. (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx ⊃ Cx)]3. (∃x)Ax ∨ (∃x)Bx / (∃x)Cx
(17) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)Ax ≡ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. (x)(Cx ⊃ Bx) / (x)Ax ≡ (∃x)Cx
(16) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)[(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. (∃x)(∼Ax ∨ Dx) ⊃ (x)Ex / (x)Cx ∨ (x)Ex
(15) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. (∃x)Cx ⊃ (x)(Dx • Ex) / (x)(Ax ⊃ Ex)
(14) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ∨ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / (∃x)Cx
(13) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (x)(Bx ⊃ Cx)2. (∃x)Dx ⊃ (∃x)Bx / (∃x)(Ax • Dx) ⊃ (∃x)Cx
(12) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (x)(Bx ⊃ Cx)2. (∃x)Dx ⊃ (x)∼Cx / (x)[(Ax • Dx) ⊃ ∼Bx]
(11) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)[(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. (x)[(Cx ∨ Dx) ⊃ ∼Ax] / (x)∼Ax
(10) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. Am ∨ An / (∃x)Bx
(9) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (x)(Cx ⊃ Dx) / (∃x)(Ax ∨ Cx) ⊃ (∃x)(Bx ∨ Dx)
(8) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ ∼(∃x)Ax / (x)∼Ax
(7) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)[(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. (x)[(Cx ∨ Dx) ⊃ Ex] / (x)(Ax ⊃ Ex)
(6) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (x)Bx 2. An ⊃ ∼Bn / ∼An
(5) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (x)[(Ax • Bx) ⊃ Cx] / (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx)
(4) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx)2. (∃x)Cx ⊃ (∃x)(Bx • Dx) / (∃x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)Bx
(3) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. ∼(∃x)Cx / (x)∼Ax
(2) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (∃x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. (∃x)(Cx ∨ Dx) ⊃ (x)Ex / (x)(Ax ⊃ Ex)
★(1) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments.1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx • Cx)]
★10. It is not the case that some physicians are either on the golf course or in the hospital. All of the neurologists are physicians in the hospital. Either some physicians are cardiologists or some physicians are neurologists. Th erefore, some cardiologists are not on the golf course. (P, G, H,
9. All poorly trained allergists and dermatologists are untrustworthy specialists.It is not the case, however, that some specialists are untrustworthy. Th erefore, it is not the case that some dermatologists are poorly trained. (P, A, D, U, S) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form.
8. If some obstetricians are not gynecologists, then some hematologists are radiologists.But it is not the case that there are any hematologists or gynecologists.Th erefore, it is not the case that there are any obstetricians. (O, G, H, R) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then
★7. All pathologists are specialists and all internists are generalists. Therefore, since it is not the case that some specialists are generalists, it is not the case that some pathologists are internists. (P, S, I, G) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of
6. It is not the case that some internists are not physicians. Furthermore, it is not the case that some physicians are not doctors of medicine. Th erefore, all internists are doctors of medicine. (I, P, D) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier
5. All physicians who did not attend medical school are incompetent. It is not the case, however, that some physicians are incompetent. Th erefore, all physicians have attended medical school. (P, A, I) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier rules
★4. Either some general practitioners are pediatricians or some surgeons are endocrinologists. But it is not the case that there are any endocrinologists.Th erefore, there are some pediatricians. (G, P, S, E) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier
3. If some surgeons are allergists, then some psychiatrists are radiologists. But no psychiatrists are radiologists. Th erefore, no surgeons are allergists. (S, A, P, R) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier rules and the eighteen rules of inference
2. Either Dr. Adams is an internist or all the pathologists are internists. But it is not the case that there are any internists. Th erefore, Dr. Adams is not a pathologist.(I, P) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier rules and the eighteen rules of
★1. If all the physicians are either hematologists or neurologists, then there are no cardiologists. But Dr. Frank is a cardiologist. Th erefore, some physicians are not neurologists. (P, H, N, C) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier rules and
(15) 1. ∼(∃x)(Ax ∨ Bx)2. (∃x)Cx ⊃ (∃x)Ax 3. (∃x)Dx ⊃ (∃x)Bx / ∼(∃x)(Cx ∨ Dx) Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect
(14) 1. (∃x)∼Ax ⊃ (x)∼Bx 2. (∃x)∼Ax ⊃ (∃x)Bx 3. (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / (x)Cx Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★(13) 1. (x)(Ax • ∼Bx) ⊃ (∃x)Cx 2. ∼(∃x)(Cx ∨ Bx) / ∼(x)Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(12) 1. (x)[(Ax • Bx) ⊃ Cx]2. ∼(x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) / ∼(x)Bx Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(11) 1. ∼(∃x)(Ax • ∼Bx)2. ∼(∃x)(Ax • ∼Cx) / (x)[Ax ⊃ (Bx • Cx)] Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★(10) 1. ∼(∃x)(Ax • ∼Bx)2. ∼(∃x)(Bx • ∼Cx) / (x)(Ax ⊃ Cx) Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(9) 1. (∃x)(Ax ∨ Bx) ⊃ (x)Cx 2. (∃x)∼Cx / ∼(∃x)Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(8) 1. (x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)∼Bx 2. ∼(x)Bx ⊃ (∃x)∼Cx / (x)Cx ⊃ (∃x)∼Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★(7) 1. (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)2. ∼(x)Cx ∨ (x)Ax 3. ∼(x)Bx / (∃x)∼Cx Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(6) 1. (∃x)∼Ax ⊃ (x)(Bx ⊃ Cx)2. ∼(x)(Ax ∨ Cx) / ∼(x)Bx Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(5) 1. (x)(Ax • Bx) ∨ (x)(Cx • Dx)2. ∼(x)Dx / (x)Bx Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★(4) 1. (∃x)Ax ∨ (∃x)(Bx • Cx)2. ∼(∃x)Bx / (∃x)Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
(3) 1. ∼(∃x)Ax / (x)(Ax ⊃ Bx)
(2) 1. (∃x)∼Ax ∨ (∃x)∼Bx 2. (x)Bx / ∼(x) Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★(1) 1. (x)Ax ⊃ (∃x)Bx 2. (x)∼Bx / (∃x)∼Ax Use the change of quantifi er rule together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.
★10. If the artichokes in the kitchen are ripe, then the guests will be surprised.Furthermore, if the artichokes in the kitchen are fl avorful, then the guests will be pleased. Th e artichokes in the kitchen are ripe and fl avorful. Th erefore, the guests will be surprised and pleased. (A, K, R,
9. If there are any ripe watermelons, then the caretakers performed well.Furthermore, if there are any large watermelons, then whoever performed well will get a bonus. Th ere are some large, ripe watermelons. Th erefore, the caretakers will get a bonus. (R, W, C, P, L, B) Translate the following
8. Some huckleberries are ripe. Furthermore, some boysenberries are sweet. If there are any huckleberries, then the boysenberries are edible if they are sweet.Th erefore, some boysenberries are edible. (H, R, B, S, E) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Th en use the eighteen

Showing 500 - 600 of 2473

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Last

Step by Step Answers

Services

Sitemap
Fun
Definitions
Become Tutor
Used Textbooks
Study Help Categories
Recent Questions
Expert Questions
Campus Wear
Sell Your Books

Company Info

Security
Copyrights
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
SolutionInn Fee
Scholarship
Online Quiz
Give Feedback, Get Rewards

Get In Touch

About Us
Contact Us
Career
Jobs
FAQ
Student Discount
Campus Ambassador

Secure Payment

Download Our App

© 2026 SolutionInn. All Rights Reserved