Do it according to the example started.

do this one. Thank you!

Use conditional proof and the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Having done so, attempt to derive the conclutions without using conditional proof.

The last one I sent is clearly visible. just do it on the last paper. don't do it the first one.

sont dom Thema 20 tror of the time the one 30 Cound your demon) #8 needs a different approach. Since the conclusion ISN'T a conditional statement, you aren't able to use the conclusion as the goal for the CP strategy. Instead, work backwards from #10 to #9 and from #9 to #8. When you get to line #8, you'll have a conditional. Line #8 becomes the CONDITIONAL GOAL you use to set up your CP subproof in lines #4-7. (20) 1. A[B (C.-D)] 2. (BVE) (DVE) I(AB) ( CE) 13. ACP 14. 3 15. 3 16. 1,4 17. 5,6 18. LO 19. 2,8 110. 7 111. 9,10 112. 7 113. 11,12 14. 3-13 (20) 1. A[B > (C.-D)] 2. (BVE) - (DVE) /( AB) = ( CE) ACP 13. 1 14. 3 3 15. 1 16. 1,4 5,6 17. I 18. 1 5 19. 2,8 110. 7 111. 9,10 112. 7 113. 11,12 14. 3-13 sont dom Thema 20 tror of the time the one 30 Cound your demon) #8 needs a different approach. Since the conclusion ISN'T a conditional statement, you aren't able to use the conclusion as the goal for the CP strategy. Instead, work backwards from #10 to #9 and from #9 to #8. When you get to line #8, you'll have a conditional. Line #8 becomes the CONDITIONAL GOAL you use to set up your CP subproof in lines #4-7. (20) 1. A[B (C.-D)] 2. (BVE) (DVE) I(AB) ( CE) 13. ACP 14. 3 15. 3 16. 1,4 17. 5,6 18. LO 19. 2,8 110. 7 111. 9,10 112. 7 113. 11,12 14. 3-13 (20) 1. A[B > (C.-D)] 2. (BVE) - (DVE) /( AB) = ( CE) ACP 13. 1 14. 3 3 15. 1 16. 1,4 5,6 17. I 18. 1 5 19. 2,8 110. 7 111. 9,10 112. 7 113. 11,12 14. 3-13