Question

can someone please help me with this problem... (a) translate the argument into symbolic form and (b) determine if the argument is valid or invalid. You may compare the argument to a standard form or use a truth table. 36. If I can get my child to preschool by 8:45 a.m., then I can take the 9:00 a.m. class. If I can take the 9:00 a.m. class, then I can be done by 2:00 p.m. ∴ If I can get my child to preschool by 8:45 a.m., then I can be done by 2:00 p.m.

Answer 1

Grr...I don't like these...

Answer 2

the second part of a and the first part of b are the same statement so you need to use the same letter. For the valid forms of arguments are there any that show two conditional statements as premises? Check to see if what you have matches that.


a: p-->q
b: p-->q
c: p-->q
This is what my professor said...

Answer 3

Yes, series og linked implications.

Answer 4

this is my 2nd time doing this college math class.. I cant fail it a 2nd time.. lol

Answer 5

child to preschool by 8:45 a.m Lets call that one p

Answer 6

the 9:00 a.m. class and this q

Answer 7

If I can get my child to preschool by 8:45 a.m., then I can take the 9:00 a.m. class

p->q

Answer 8

I can be done by 2:00 p.m r

Answer 9

If I can take the 9:00 a.m. class, then I can be done by 2:00 p.m

p->r

Answer 10

Oh, i didn't see the therefore until just now....

Answer 11

So there are only 2 plus conclusion....

Answer 12

there is 3 of them

Answer 13

Yes but one is the conclusion, u want to know whether the conclusion follows from the arguments...

Answer 14

So the arguments are p->q and q->r therefore by transitivity p-r

Answer 15

p->r

Answer 16

If I can get my child to preschool by 8:45 a.m., then I can be done by 2:00 p.m.

and this, the conclusion says p-> r so the arguments equal the conclusion Done.

Answer 17

ok.. thank you ;)

Answer 18

ur welcome:-)