Justify the rule of universal transitivity , which states that if ∀ x ( P ( x ) → Q ( x ) ) and ∀ x ( Q ( x ) → R ( x ) ) are true, then ∀ x ( P ( x ) → R ( x ) ) is true, where the domains of all quantifiers are the same.
Justify the rule of universal transitivity , which states that if ∀ x ( P ( x ) → Q ( x ) ) and ∀ x ( Q ( x ) → R ( x ) ) are true, then ∀ x ( P ( x ) → R ( x ) ) is true, where the domains of all quantifiers are the same.
Justify the rule ofuniversal transitivity, which states that if
∀
x
(
P
(
x
)
→
Q
(
x
)
)
and
∀
x
(
Q
(
x
)
→
R
(
x
)
)
are true, then
∀
x
(
P
(
x
)
→
R
(
x
)
)
is true, where the domains of all quantifiers are the same.
The notation xP(x) denotes the universal quantification
of P(x). Here v is called the universal quantifier. We read
VXP(x) as "for all xP(x)" or “for every xP(x)." An element for
which P(x) is true is called a counterexample of vxP(x).
A
True
В
False
Let P(x, y) be "x has taken class y," and Q(x, y) be "x has passed class y" and M(y)
be "y is a math class," where the domain of x consists of all students in your class and
the domain of y consists of all classes at LU. Use quantifiers to express this statement.
(Assume that all email messages that were sent are received.)
Every student in your class has passed a class at Liberty University that is not a math
class.
EXERCISE 1.13.3: Show an argument with quantified statements is invalid.
Show that the given argument is invalid by giving values for the predicates P and Q over the domain (a, b).
(a)
x (P(x) → Q(x))
3x - P(x)
:: 3x -Q(x)
3x (P(x) v Q(x))
3x -Q(x)
:: 3x P(x)
~
Feedback?
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, subject and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.