Assignment # 5

Please read the following instructions:

1. Please provide a complete solution.

2. Plagiarism or Cheating is not allowed. Even if you cheat in only one question, you
will be marked zero in the entire assignment.
3. NAME: __________Mahad Elahi_____________________________________________

4. SECTION: _____________________________A1_____________________________________

5. ROLL NUMBER: _________L1F21BSCS0022__________________________________

Total Marks: 20
Submission Due date: 5rd February 2022 (on portal)

Question No 1: (6 Marks)
Construct a truth table for the given statement.

( 1 ) . ( p q ) →[ ( p q ) ]

P q q ( p q) ( p q) [ ( p q )] ( p q ) →[ ( p q ) ]

T T F F T F T

T F T T F T T

F T F F F T T

F F T F F T T
 (2). [( p →q ¿ p ¿ → p
P q P→ q [( p →q ¿ p ¿ [( p →q ¿ p ¿ → p

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T F T

F F T F T

(3). [ ( p → q ) p]→ q
P q p →q ( p →q ) p [ ( p → q ) p]→ q

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T F T

F F T F T

Question No 2: (4 Marks)
Determine whether the given statements are equivalent.

a).
Solution:
Here first we write it in argument form :

P= Kevin wins

Q= we celebrate

Conclusion= Kevin will win .

So according to this we make its symbolic form.
p →q (1)premise
q→ p (2)premise
NOW
According to (1)premise which is a conditional statement and (2)premise which is also
conditional statement these both statements don’t stand on the conditional ⇌ contrapositive
or converse ⇌ inverse which is necessary for equivalent statement.
We can also verify by using the truth table

P q p →q q→ p

T T T T

T F F T

F T T F

F F T T

Ans: This verify that the given statement is not equivalent statement.

b).
Solution:
Here first we write it in argument form :

P= She attends the meeting.

Q= She make sale.

Conclusion= She did not attend the meeting.

So according to this we make its symbolic form.
p →q (1)premise
q→ p (2)premise
NOW
According to (1)premise which is a conditional statement and (2)premise which is also
contrapositive statement these both statements don’t stand on the conditional ⇌
contrapositive or converse ⇌ inverse which is necessary for equivalent statement.
We can also verify by using the truth table

P q p q p →q q→ p

T T F F T T

T F F T F F

F T T F T T

F F T T T T

Ans: This verify that the given statement is equivalent statement.

Question No 3: (4 Marks)
Write the contrapositive of the statement and use the contrapositive to determine whether the original
statement is true or false.

1).

Solution:
 First of all contrapositive statement is p →q= q → p

Here first we write it in argument form :

P:3 x−7=11
Q: x ≠ 7

So according to this we make its symbolic form.

p →q (1)premise
If 3 x−7=11 then x ≠ 7

So if we put the value of 7 in above equation then

3 x−7 = 11

3(7) −¿ 7= 11

21 −¿ 7=11

14=11

So it is right

Now if we make its contrapositive symbolic form then

q→ p (2)premise
if x=7 then 3 x−7 ≠ 11
so if we put the value of x which is 7 in the equation then its value is not equal to 11.

Putting values:

3 x−7 ≠ 11

3(7) – 7 ≠ 11

21 – 7 ≠ 11

14≠ 11

So it is also right

Ans:

so this show that the original statement is true according to contrapositive statement.

2).
Solution:
First of all contrapositive statement is p →q= q → p.

Here first we write it in argument form :

P: a≠ 3
Q: |a| ≠ 3

So according to this we make its symbolic form.

p →q
If a≠ 3then |a| ≠ 3

Now here we put the values of a=-3 in the equation then we get

|-3|≠ 3

3≠ 3

So the answer is wrong

Now if we make its contrapositive symbolic form then

if |a| ¿ 3then a¿ 3
now if we put value value a= −¿3 in the above equation then

|a|=3

|-3|=3

3=3

So the answer is right

Ans:

so this show that the original statement is false according to contrapositive statement.

Question No 4: (2 Marks)
Use a standard form to determine whether each argument is valid or invalid.
a).

Solution:
Here if remove the negation from the P argument and then make the symbolic form

So

p →q
p

∴q
So now it make the standard valid argument which is Modus Ponens.

b).

Solution:
Here if remove the negation from the q argument and then make the symbolic form

So

p →q
q

∴p
So now it make the invalid argument which is Fallacy of converse.
Question # 5 (4 Marks)

We have discussed fallacies in class. Please give two examples of fallacies which we have not discussed
in class. Explain them

Answer:
Here are some examples on logical fallacy of Ad hominem :-

Example 1

Don’t listen to Becky’s opinion on welfare; she just opposes it because she’s from a rich family.

Example 2

This trick, literally translated as “to the man,” subtly or overtly distorts a person's

character, destroying their credibility no matter how valid their argument is. "I was surprised you

agreed with her. She's kind of an extremist."

Example 3

Don’t listen to Dave’s argument on gun control. He is not the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

Example 4

Mahee says that one should not listen to Ali on matters of budgetary changes for the annual fashion
show because Ali has a very poor taste in clothes.