Proofs II, #11
derive ~S
| 1. | (F & ~G) v (T & ~W) | premise | |
| 2. | (W & H) | premise | |
| 3. | ~(F ⊃ G) ⊃ (H ⊃ ~S) | premise | |
| 4. | |||
| 5. | |||
| 6. | |||
| 7. | |||
| 8. | |||
| 9. | |||
| 10. |
|
Strategy |
| Get ~(F
⊃
G) which is ~(~F v G) which is (F & ~G) so get (F & ~G) by getting ~(T & ~W) which is (~T v ~~W) or (~T v W) But we have (W & H) and so we have W and so ~T v W by disjoining.
|