0

I'm having trouble understanding writing out a proof. The proof I'm trying to work with is : [![enter image description here][1]][1] How do I reach this goal? Which rules do I use and with which support steps to each rule (proofs to prove each step?) Using only inference rules, reit, quantifier rules. What have I missed writing out?

closed as unclear what you're asking by Graham Kemp, Joseph Weissman Jun 6 at 3:00

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • It's already resolved! – user39869 Jun 6 at 3:25
  • My calculation was completely wrong so look directly at grahams comment and what he has put up for correct explanations! – user39869 Jun 6 at 3:26
  • This is the third context-less question you've asked about Fitch-style proofs. – Noah Schweber Jun 6 at 3:52
1

On line 9 referencing conjunction elimination from line 8 should derive either B(a) or K(a), but not R(a).

You might start this with the assumption on line 8 which is made to hopefully eliminate the existential in line 2.

Then use conjunction elimination to derive B(a) from that assumption. Use universal elimination from line 1 to derive B(a) → R(a). Those two lines allow one to derive R(a). Use conjunction elimination to get K(a) and then conjunction introduction to combine R(a) ∧ K(a). Use existential introduction to turn that into ∃x(R(x) ∧ K(x)).

That will allow you to discharge the assumption using existential elimination to complete the proof.

0

Here's the skeleton for the proof. You begin by assuming a witness to the existential in the premises, aiming to derive a witness for the existential in the conclusion.

  |  Ɐx (Bx → Rx)      Premise
  |_ Ǝx (Bx ˄ Kx)      Premise
  |  |_ [c] Bc ˄ Kc    Assumption
  |  |  :              ˄E
  |  |  :              ˄E
  |  |  :              ⱯE
  |  |  :              →E
  |  |  Kc ˄ Rc        ˄I
  |  |  Ǝx (Kx ˄ Rx)   ƎI
  |  Ǝx (Kx ˄ Rx)      ƎE
  • thank you so much graham! Could you please tell me the : steps as well and which steps I should higlight to each step? – user39869 Jun 6 at 0:20
  • Please, try to do it for yourself first. @maxpax – Graham Kemp Jun 6 at 0:26
  • I did, and the way I tried it turned out like the one above, so I'm completely lost and not sure what to do? Unfortunately, I'm not gifted in this at all. – user39869 Jun 6 at 0:51
  • @maxpax The first two suggestions are ˄E, conjunction elimination. So what conditional(s) are there to be eliminated? What two derivations could result? – Graham Kemp Jun 6 at 1:32
  • Thank you graham! It's all figured out! – user39869 Jun 6 at 2:06