DISCRETE MATH: Determine whether an argument is correct or not

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on evaluating the validity of four logical arguments using principles from discrete mathematics, specifically Modus Tollens and Modus Ponens. Argument A is valid, employing Modus Tollens to conclude that Mia is not enrolled in the university. Argument B is invalid, falling into the fallacy of denying the hypothesis. Argument C is also invalid, as it commits the fallacy of affirming the conclusion. Argument D is valid, utilizing Modus Ponens to assert that Hamilton sets at least a dozen traps.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Modus Tollens and Modus Ponens
  • Familiarity with logical fallacies, specifically denying the hypothesis and affirming the conclusion
  • Basic knowledge of propositional logic notation
  • Ability to construct logical arguments and evaluate their validity
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of logical reasoning in discrete mathematics
  • Learn about common logical fallacies and how to identify them
  • Practice constructing and evaluating arguments using Modus Tollens and Modus Ponens
  • Explore advanced topics in propositional logic and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Students of discrete mathematics, logic enthusiasts, and anyone looking to improve their reasoning skills in evaluating arguments.

VinnyCee
Messages
486
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Determine whether the argument is correct or incorrect and explain why.

A) Everyone enrolled in the university has lived in a dormitory. Mis has never lived in a dormitory. Therefore, Mia is not enrolled in the university.

B) A convertible car is fun to drive. Isaac's car is not a convertible. Therefore, Isaac's car is not fun to drive.

C) Quincy likes all action movies. Quincy likes the movie Eight Men Out. Therefore, Eight Men Out is an action movie.

D) All lobstermen set at least a dozen traps. Hamilton is a lobsterman. Therefore, Hamilton sets at least a dozen traps.

Homework Equations



Modus Tollens:

\neg\,q
p\,\longrightarrow\,q
----------
\therefore\,\neg\,p

Modus Ponens:

p
p\,\longrightarrow\,q
----------
\therefore\,q

Fallacey of denying the hypothesis.

The Attempt at a Solution



A) E(x) = "x is enrolled in the university" and L(x) = "x has lived in a dormitory"

\neg\,L(Mia)
E(x)\,\longrightarrow\,L(x)
----------
\therefore\,\neg\,E(Mia)

Argument is correct, it uses Modus Tollens.B) C(x) = "x is a convertible" and F(x) = "x is fun to drive"

\neg\,C(Isaac's\,\,car)
C(x)\,\longrightarrow\,F(x)
----------
\therefore\,\neg\,F(Isaac's car)

Argument is invalid, fallacey of denying the hypothesis.C) I don't know how to set this one up, can some one help? I think it is invalid because of Fallacey of Affirming the conclusion, is that right?D) L(x) = "x is a lobsterman" and T(x) = "x sets at elast a dozen traps"

L(Hamilton)
L(x)\,\longrightarrow\,T(x)
----------
\therefore\,T(Hamilton)

Argument is correct, it uses Modus Ponens.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
C: Yes, it is invalid. Use
Q(x) = "Quincy likes movie x"
A(x) = "movie x is an action movie"
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
13K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
11K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
13K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K