[Logic] Proofs and Rules #1

[@NyaLexar]

i dont think you understand the sheer amount of people you've saved with your videos. thank you thank you thank YOU so much for this amazing channel

[@CASE-vc3fm]

Hi! I can't express how much your videos are helping me through my first year of Computer Science. You're easily the most helpful person on KZbin, I am very happy I found your videos on Logic and Discrete Maths!! Keep up the great work. Much love from Sweden! Xero

[@Trevtutor]

+Xero Gray Thanks! That was the goal of this channel: to create the resources I would have wanted when I was taking the courses.

[@ChibiNekoKira]

Fulført graden din?:) Håper alt gikk bra

[@thekalinka918]

@@Trevtutor Hello, do you have anything on disjunction elimination?

[@kawaii_hawaii222]

@@Trevtutor Hello, do you have a hint for me how to prove ~A↔ B, ~B ↔ C, ~C ↔ A ╞ λ that? I already used the Df rule but I still cannot see how to show that an absurdity follows... Help would be much appreciated... Thank you!

[@dudydude3287]

@@ChibiNekoKira Jeg vet ikke jeg skal se Norsk her!

[@aidendowns6136]

My professor is a bumbling buffoon and cannot teach this to save his life. the videos are incredibly helpful. Is Zoom meeting tutoring available?

[@epicplanter3480]

wow

[@godisnotinvisible]

Hello, just wanted to thank you for these videos. I was perplexed by the Fitch system as presented in the set text (Barwise), andfinding external, clear and basic materials about the Fitch system proved challenging. Thanks to Hurley I began to understand what deductive was about and even enjoy it, but ultimately I need to use Fitch in the exam. Thanks so much for taking the time to clearly and comprehensive explain Fitch. In part thanks to you hopefully I'll pass.

[@TheGodshelper]

4:20 "If you have A and B you can get A and B" call me nerd, but im dying here hahahaha

[@sweetamishbutter7]

Conditional Elimination makes way more sense. The arrow is a Conditional, If X then Y. Therfore, if you know X is true, You eliminate the conditional arrow and conclude Y. Conditional Elimination.

[@Neptoid]

8:14 Ass. is Assm. (Assumption) shortened further. On the KZbin platform it is risks breaking their ToS

[@dudydude3287]

haha ass

[@dannydevke80]

Easily understood simple and straight to the point

[@Recordingization]

Thanks for the practical illustration!

[@ms-uj3qe]

Using this rules on a set of assumptions A and concluding C is the same as saying that A entails C? If so, why? (Great lectures btw)

[@demenion3521]

so a proof is basically just another formalism for proving that ((AND(set of assumptions)) --> Consequence) is a tautology, right?

[@bensu6672]

I wish I woud have found this a few weeks ago but still thank youuuuu, thank you so so much

[@nilnil6538]

Hello where is the answer for those four questions? Cheers mate

[@chen2329]

THANK YOU SOOOOO MUCH!!!!!! You just saved my math and cs class!

[@bradleyweedall2792]

the amount of adds youtube puts in videos is insane

[@babute21]

so is modus ponens the same as biconditional elimination?

[@ivangeofrey4785]

thanks for your tutorial is helped me a lot understand logic

[@sadaquekhan]

Where are the answer for the last questions ?

[@liamtarr]

He did say during the video that he was leaving the exercises up to the viewer. If you want, I can give you how to answer them.

[@liamtarr]

a) 1| A -> (B ^ ~C) Assumption 2| A ^ B Assumption |---------------------------- 3| A 2, ^E 4| B ^ ~C 1, 3, MP |---------------------------- 5| ~C 4, ^E

[@liamtarr]

b) 1| ~B -> (D ^ E) Assumption 2| (A ^ ~B) ^ C Assumption 3| A ^ ~B 2, ^E 4| A 3, ^E 5| ~B 3, ^E 6| C 2. ^E 7| ~B ^ C 5, 6, ^I 8| D ^ E 1, 5, MP 9| D 8, ^E 10| E 8, ^E 11| E ^ D 9, 10, ^I 12| (E ^ D) ^ (~B ^ C) 7, 11, ^I

[@liamtarr]

c) 1| A ^ ~B Assumption 2| (A v ~C) -> D Assumption 3| A 1, ^E 4| ~B 1, ^E 5| A v ~C 3, vI 6| D 2, 5, MP 7| D ^ ~B 4, 6, ^I

[@liamtarr]

d) 1| ~F ^ ~G Assumption 2| ~G -> H Assumption 3| (H ^ ~F) ~I Assumption 4| ~F 1, ^E 5| ~G 1, ^E 6| H 2, 5, MP 7| H ^ ~F 4, 6, ^I 8| ~I 3, 7, MP 9| H ^ ~I 6, 8, ^I

[@gingerbeardworkouts2955]

Great tutorial thank you so much!!!!!!! Have been searching the whole internet for guidance like this! Keep it up !!!

[@pascal1888-]

Great video

[@khitem42]

the answer?

[@1gks]

8:16 this class has me so gone that i found this funny 😭

[@thekalinka918]

Do you have anything on disjunction elimination?

[@CEOofH-np6tl]

FUCK INTRO TO LOGIC!!!! Passed the course tho 💀

[@kuza.the.artist]

so helpful thank you!

[@ranam]

Choosing a rule of inference is a blind strategy I guess am I correct 🙏🙏

[@TheFearlocator]

THANK YOU SO MUCH!!

[@linahu311]

Thank you so much for this video!!!!

[@dirtylittleartclub]

Why label the lines by letter? I,j,k? So confusing

[@lindseylazo423]

As a fellow logic tutor, hearing you say "conditional elimination" bothers you makes me scream x'D I'm bothered by MP!

[@joaorafael6202]

captions? :(

[@coltonprice5186]

I have a test due at midnight, if by God anyone can answer these. I would do anything. This is so hard. Here’s the test: Solve the following problems and then explain in your own words, in paragraph form, why you took the steps you did to solve the problem that way (ex: why did you apply conjunction elimination to steps one and two?) (5pts each; 3pts per proof and 2pts per explanation) From the below premises, prove T (∼ P & Q) ( R → P) (∼ R → S) (S → T) 2) From the below premises, prove ∼ P (P → Q) (∼ Q v R) (∼ S → ∼ R) (∼ S → (Q & T)) ∼ T 3) From the below premises, prove P (Q → P) (∼ Q → R) ∼R 4) From the below premises, prove ∼ (T→V) (P→(Q→R)) P ((Q→R)→¬S)) ((T→V)→S

[@epicplanter3480]

rest in peace man what happened

[@genericnamethingy]

thank you thank you thank you!

[@harvey2599]

im even more confused. fuck this. imma just chatgpt my whole assignment.

[@GMATprepEU]

Thank you!!!!!!!

[@Br4vehe4rt]

college sucks