Questions tagged [fitch]
Frederic Brenton Fitch (1908 – 1987) was an American logician who taught at Yale. He invented the Fitch-style for natural deduction. He is also famous for the paradox of knowability. The tag may also refer to natural deduction proof environments in Fitch-style calculus for giving and checking proofs.
99
questions
1
vote
2
answers
141
views
Structure of an if and only if proof
I am trying to get this proof to work out and so far I feel like I have the first part right but I'm stuck on how to get the A→B part.
- 37
2
votes
2
answers
254
views
Solving a proof in which the goal is the negation of a variable in Fitch
I'm working on an assignment and I'm stuck on this proof. I feel like I'm on the right track but I can't find the way to prove the goal.
A ^ B
(A ^ ~C) --> ~D
A -> ~C
(B ^ E) --> (C v D)
~E
I ...
1
vote
3
answers
648
views
Fitch Proof Question
I'm having trouble with a proof and I'm not sure if it's valid or not. If it appears to be invalid, we are supposed to assign names to the letters in the proof and check it in a World, but when I do ...
3
votes
1
answer
426
views
How to Prove P(a) → ∀x(P(x) ∨ ¬(x = a)) using Natural Deduction
How would a formal Fitch proof look like.
I am given P(a) → ∀x(P(x) ∨ ¬(x = a)) to prove using Natural Deduction of predicate logic.
I am confused on how to proceed with the proof.
Please advice me ...
- 47
-2
votes
2
answers
515
views
Fitch-style natural deduction
How to prove the following questions?
(a) p from assumption ¬(p → q)
(b) ¬¬p → p from no assumptions.
- 15
1
vote
1
answer
421
views
trouble with rules of inference practice problems [closed]
Prove the following symbolized arguments applying the appropriate rules of inference:
1)
P ∨ Q =
M ⊃ ¬ Q
M =conjunction
Therefore
P
2)
(P V Q) ∧ ¬ Q
P ⊃ R =...
-1
votes
2
answers
254
views
Language Proof and logic Chapter 13 problem 31
I have been working on this problem for over an hour and I think I have simply missed something. I need some help. I don't see how this is supposed to work out
Here are the premises:
∀x ∀y[Likes(x,...
- 73
0
votes
2
answers
591
views
Language proof and logic Chapter 15 question 21 how?
I'm really not understanding the set up of how to go about solving this problem any help is welcome
- 73
0
votes
3
answers
160
views
In Fitch, how does one prove ¬(B ∧ C) from two premises (A → ¬B) and (¬A → ¬C) [closed]
Help me out please!! I have been trying to solve it for hours
- 25
0
votes
2
answers
791
views
Language proof and logic Chapter 15 question 16 help
I'm trying to go about solving this problem but I'm having problems even knowing how to approach it. Can someone help me to set it up?
Here is the premise: ∀x∀y(x ⊆ y ↔️ ∀z(z ∈ x ⟶ z ∈ y)
Here is ...
- 73
0
votes
2
answers
410
views
language proof and logic chapter 13 question 49 Help
Premises:
∃xP(x)
∀x∀y((P(x)∧P(y)) → x = y)
Prove:
∃x(P(x)∧∀y(P(y) → y = x))
I've started it but the end is starting to get super muddy and not work out and I don't know where I went wrong.
- 73
0
votes
1
answer
228
views
language logic and proof chapter 12 question 49 and question 50
I've been working on this and I can't seem to figure out what exactly is going wrong can anyone help?
- 73
0
votes
2
answers
326
views
In Fitch, how does one prove “P” from the premise “(¬P ∨ Q)→P”?
I can't figure out how to prove that formally. Please, help!!
- 25
2
votes
4
answers
3k
views
How to prove ‘∃xP(x)’ from ‘¬∀x(P(x)→Q(x))’
What would a formal Fitch proof for this look like?
I am given ¬∀x(P(x)→Q(x)), and need to derive ∃xP(x) from it.
I started with this, but I don't know if I am doing the right thing, and where to go ...
- 125
1
vote
4
answers
159
views
Symbolic Logic - Quantifier Proof (w/ Conditionals)
I'm not sure if lines 6 - 7 & 8 - 11 are being done correctly. I feel like it's necessary to prove 12 which proves the rest of the problem.
I'm a bit stuck on lines 8 - 11. I initially tried to ...
user35766
1
vote
2
answers
825
views
Fitch Proof by Contradiction help
Hi, I'm pretty new to writing formal proofs and I was wondering if I could get some help solving this question.
I've set up the problem and I was thinking of perhaps proving it by contradiction that ...
2
votes
2
answers
402
views
Fitch Biconditional Proof Help?
Hi, I'm starting to learn formal proofs using Fitch, but I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out my arguments. I've generally mapped out the subproofs I was considering to use, but I'm unsure how to ...
1
vote
4
answers
4k
views
How to prove : (( P → Q ) ∨ ( Q → R )) by natural deduction
Here's another of Tomassi's exercises I can't solve (Logic, page 106):
: (( P → Q ) ∨ ( Q → R ))
I have to use natural deduction and the only rules I know are:
• assumptions,
• modus ponendo ...
- 123
1
vote
1
answer
78
views
Conditional IFF - Not sure what's wrong
"Not a valid application of the rule".
I don't think 7 - 8 is something that really needs to be proven beyond a reit, but I feel like you should be able to...
I'm quite confused on proving Cube(a) ...
user35766
1
vote
2
answers
147
views
Symbolic Conditional Help
Premise:
(Tet(a) ^ Tet(b)) v (Cube(c) ^ Cube(d))
Cube(c) -> Dodec(e)
Goal:
~Tet(a) -> Dodec(e)
Anyone have a clue on where to start with this?
user35766
2
votes
2
answers
510
views
How does one prove ‘(B→C)→¬A’ from ‘(A→B)∨C’ and ‘(A→¬C)’ in Fitch?
I am trying to work my way through this Fitch proof, and I am not sure what I am doing wrong, but I keep getting stuck no matter what I try.
First attempt:
Second attempt:
- 125
0
votes
2
answers
1k
views
Does rejecting the law of the excluded middle mean rejecting it for all propositions or only for those one cannot derive?
Wikipedia describes the law of the excluded middle as such:
In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) states that for any proposition, either that proposition is ...
- 19.2k
0
votes
2
answers
204
views
Why does modal logic need to use ◻◻p?
In Frederic Fitch's Symbolic Logic he proves (11.8, page 66) that "◻p" coimplicates "◻◻p".
In 11.10 (page 66), he writes,
A system almost the same as the system Lewis calls S2 is obtainable by ...
- 19.2k
1
vote
0
answers
56
views
How did Fitch's opposition to the Russell-Whitehead theory of types turn out since the 1950's?
In a footnote to Appendix C of Frederic Fitch's Symbolic Logic (page 217), Fitch writes about his article, "Self-Reference in Philosophy":
It is reprinted here in order to indicate more fully my ...
- 19.2k
3
votes
3
answers
2k
views
2 simple Formal Fitch Proofs
I'm having difficulty proving these. They seem obvious, but I can't figure how to set up formal proofs for them. Could anyone give me clues on how to start them?
¬(P∧¬Q) from the premise P→Q;
¬Q→(R→P)...
- 125
1
vote
3
answers
966
views
Prove transitivity in Fitch
How to prove transitivity in Fitch.
Is it Ok?
| 1. a = b
| 2. b = c
| 3. c = c =Intro
| 4. a = c =Elim: 3, 2
| 5. b = c =Elim: 4, 1
- 113
4
votes
4
answers
1k
views
Given p ⇒ q and m ⇒ p ∨ q, use the Fitch System to prove m ⇒ q
I have spent about 6 hours now trying to prove this using the Fitch system and I just keep going in circles! Attached is one of the 500 attempts :) I have a feeling it's done fairly simply and ...
- 81
2
votes
3
answers
787
views
Prove ¬∃x ∀y (E(x, y) ↔ ¬E(y, y)) given no premises
The only way I could think of to do this problem is reductio, but since the two biconditional terms are not contradictory, I am pretty stuck.
1
vote
1
answer
2k
views
LPL ( language proof and logic) - FITCH - 14.12
what's wrong with the last line in my proof? i can't understand the error on line 21
i wrote the important line of the proof :
18 - ∀z (Cube(z) → (z = c ∨ z = f))
19 - ∃y (Cube(c) ∧ Cube(y) ∧ c ≠ ...
- 113
2
votes
4
answers
513
views
In fitch, S → (R ∨ P), P → (¬R → Q) ∴ S → (Q ∨ R)
Construct a proof for the argument: S → (R ∨ P), P → (¬R → Q) ∴ S → (Q ∨ R)
I have gotten to the point in the illustration, but I am unable to figure out where to go from here. I get tricked up on ...
- 21
1
vote
4
answers
491
views
Language Logic Proof Question: ¬∃x∀y[E(x,y) ↔ ¬E(y,y)]
I am wondering if I have completed this proof properly. I don't think I have it right. It's tricky!
Conclusion: ¬∃x∀y[E(x,y) ↔ ¬E(y,y)]
¬¬∃x∀y[E(x,y) ↔ ¬E(y,y)]
∃x∀y[E(x,y) ↔ ¬E(y,y)] ¬E,1
...
- 61
2
votes
3
answers
1k
views
How do I apply existential elimination to the following Fitch proof?
I am trying to prove ∀x.∀y.loves(x,y) from Relational Proofs using the Fitch system from Barwise and Etchemendy.
I can get as far as line 5, but I cannot figure out how to apply Existential ...
- 151
-1
votes
1
answer
3k
views
fitch proof chapter 13 exercise 13.49 [closed]
Does anyone know how to solve
13.49
∃x P(x)
∀x ∀y ((P(x) ∧ P(y)) → x = y)
= ∃x (P(x) ∧ ∀y (P(y) → y = x))
and 13.50
∃x (P(x) ∧ ∀y (P(y) → y = x))
=
∀x ∀y ((P(x) ∧ P(y)) → x = y)
I have big ...
2
votes
1
answer
838
views
prove: ∃x ∃y (Cube(x) ∧ Cube(y) ∧ x ≠ y ∧ ∀z (Cube(z) → (z = x ∨ z = y)))
I need a formal (Fitch) first order logic proof for:
∃x ∃y (P(x) ∧ P(y) ∧ x ≠ y ∧ ∀z (P(z) → (z = x ∨ z = y)))
Given
∃x ∃y (P(x) ∧ P(y) ∧ x ≠ y)
∀x ∀y ∀z ((P(x) ∧ P(y) ∧ P(z)) → (x = y ∨ x = z ∨...
- 21
2
votes
2
answers
328
views
I am stuck on how to prove the contradiction of R(b,a) can anybody help me?
Here are some well-known properties of dyadic (2-place) relations:
∀xR(x, x) (Reflexivity)
∀x¬R(x, x) (Irreflexivity)
∀x∀y(R(x, y) → R(y, x)) (Symmetry)
∀x∀y(R(x, y) → ¬R(y, x)) (Asymmetry)
∀x∀y∀...
- 21
6
votes
3
answers
2k
views
In Fitch, how does one prove "(P → Q)" from the premise "(¬P ∨ Q)"?
It's all in the question really. I am working on a proof in Fitch for a class, but I am very much stuck.
I am proving the tautology that "(P → Q) ↔ (¬P ∨ Q)", and I have already finished half of it, ...
- 61
3
votes
2
answers
659
views
Formal proof : predicate logic
This is what I need to prove formally:
1.∃x Cube(x) ∧ Small(d)
.
.
.
.
Goal :∃x (Cube(x) ∧ Small(d))
I have already tried different ways, but I still can't prove the goal.
1. ∃x Cube(x) ∧ Small(d)
...
- 31
4
votes
2
answers
5k
views
Fitch Proof - LPL Exercise 8.17
I am currently finding the third part of this exercise (Conditional 3) difficult to prove. I was sure that my proof was correct, but the Fitch program is saying otherwise.
I am finding it ...
- 41
1
vote
3
answers
2k
views
Fitch Proof - Logic LPL 13.11
I am currently doing questions for my course from LPL Chapter 13.11.
I have posted the screenshot of what I am trying to do.
I am quite stuck and I can not think of a way to get to ~Tet(a). Any hint ...
- 11
2
votes
2
answers
229
views
Suppose A is a set of premises of an argument and B the conclusion of that argument. Prove that if A U {¬B} ⊢ ⊥, then A ⊢ B
Suppose A is a set of premises of an argument and B the conclusion of that argument. Prove that if A U {¬B} ⊢ ⊥, then A ⊢ B. (Use Fitch)
I have no idea where to start, can someone help?
- 21
5
votes
3
answers
755
views
How can I prove a contradiction follows from P <-> Q and P -> ~Q?
I am so close to solving this problem: (Language Logic and Proof 8.36).
https://i.stack.imgur.com/1zMnZ.jpg
All I need to do to complete the proof is show that P <-> Q and P -> ~Q is a ...
- 125
1
vote
4
answers
3k
views
Fitch Formal Logic Help 6.26
6.26
Premise:
A v (B ^C)
Premise: ~B v ~C v D
Goal:
A v D
Prove it formally without using DeMorgan's Law.
- 27
1
vote
1
answer
263
views
How would I deduce a≠c from a≠b and b≠c in Fitch?
How would I deduce a≠c from the premises a≠b and b≠c in Fitch?
This is what I've done so far.
b=b (=Intro)
b≠a (Ana Con)
b≠c (Reit)
And then for some reason I get stuck here?
I know this sounds ...
- 239
1
vote
1
answer
3k
views
Logic – Deduction in Tarski's World (Fitch/LPL 13.36)
I am working on proving the following question:
| ∀x [Dodec(x) → LeftOf(x, a)]
| ∀x [Tet(x) → RightOf(x, a)]
|–––
| ∀x [SameCol(x, a) → Cube(x)]
The question has the following rules:
[…] give a ...
user15247
3
votes
2
answers
2k
views
LPL 10.26 - Fitch - How to use ∀ Intro and ∃ Elim?
I am using LPL (Language, Proof, and Logic, commonly known as LPL) and the bundled Fitch program. I am trying to solve problem 10.26:
10.26: ∀x Tet(b) ↔ ∃w Tet(b)
Looks simple enough, as the ...
user15247
4
votes
2
answers
3k
views
Fitch style disjunction elimination
I am having difficulty in formally proving a simple argument. Consider
P(x) v Q(x)
not P(x)
----------
Q(x)
It is easy to see that the argument is indeed valid, but I cannot seem to prove it ...
- 321
3
votes
3
answers
3k
views
Prove A ∨ D from A ∨ (B ∧ C) and (¬ B ∨ ¬ C) ∨ D ( LPL Q6.26) without using --> or material implication
This is a repeated question: Language Logic and Proof Q. 6.26
Using the natural deduction rules, give a formal proof of
A ∨ D
from the premises
A ∨ (B ∧ C)
(¬ B ∨ ¬ C) ∨ D
...
- 131
2
votes
4
answers
6k
views
Conditional disjunction equivalence proof using FItch
Prove P v Q ⇔ ¬Q → P
So far I have the obvious things...
1. P v Q
_
| 2. ¬Q
| _
| 3.
| 4.
| 5.
| 6.
| 7.
| 8. P
9. ¬Q → P → Intro 2-8
I think the problem here is that I do not ...
- 347
4
votes
3
answers
2k
views
Disjunctive Syllogism in a Fitch Style System
I'm trying to prove an argument of the form:
B
~(C & B)
Therefore: ~C.
I can expand out ~(C & B) into ~C OR ~B, and with the premise B, it is clear that ~C is the case.
...
- 163