Can Logical Inference Prove an Engineer Likes Both Video Games and Literature?

  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rules
spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31

Homework Statement



Consider the following statements.
All engineers either like computer or like power tools. All engineers who like computers
like video games. All engineers who like power tools like camping out. Some engineers
like literature.
Based on these given statements, show that you can make the following inferences. Show
all steps in your work.
There is at least one engineer who likes video games and literature.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



Let E(x) be the proposition 'x is an engineer,'
Let C(x) be the proposition 'x likes computer,'
Let P(x) be the proposition 'x likes power tool,'
Let V(x) be the proposition 'x likes video games,'
Let O(x) be the proposition 'x likes camping out,'
Let L(x) be the proposition 'x likes literature,'
where x is the domain of all people.

Steps and corresponding reasons:
1. \forallx E(x) → C(x) \vee P(x) premise
2. E(a) → C(a) \vee P(a) universal generalisation
3. \forallx (E(x)\wedgeC(x)) → V(x) premise
4. (E(a)\wedgeC(a)) → V(a) universal generalisation
5. \forallx (E(x)\wedgeP(x)) → O(x) premise
6. (E(a)\wedgeP(a)) → O(a) universal generalisation
7. ∃x E(x)\wedgeL(x) premise
8. E(a)\wedgeL(a) existential generalisation


I'm not sure about the statements for universal and existential generalisation, i.e. if they should all refer to the same a.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't prove that inference, it isn't true. Suppose for example, our "universe" consists of three engineers, "A", "B", and "C". "A" likes computers and, so, video games. "B" and "C" like power tools and, so, camping out. "C" likes literature.

That satisfies all the given conditions but does not satisfy "There is at least one engineer who likes video games and literature." A is the only engineer who likes video games and he does nor like literature.

"I'm not sure about the statements for universal and existential generalisation, i.e. if they should all refer to the same a."

There is no "same a". "a" is a variable.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top