Using a proof solver answer the following (plz don't use truth tables)

Plz explain what is happen at each step

use things like the following to explain each step:

Step Tactic

1 intros H

2 destruct H2

3 left/right

4 assumption

5 split H5

and so on

Question - The laws of intuitionistic logic are not equivalent to classical logic, and catching the differences can be tricky. For example, the contrapositive inference rule,

p q q p

cannot be proven in intuitionistic logic. Using constructive logic, prove

p q) (q p)

and also

(q p) (p q).

Thank you