Is this a proper example of FORMAL logic notation? (Ǝ c ∈ Cookies such that Ǝ d ∈ duck, d wants c)
I have a question that requires an answer in 'formal' logic notation. I'm assuming that they're making a distinction between 'normal' logic notation as in: p ^ q -> r
Question 2: I have a question that reads:
Use truth table to determine whether the following arguments are valid or not. If (~p ∨ q ∨ r) holds and (q->r) holds, then infer that (p->r) holds. Here (~p ∨ q ∨ r) and (q ∨ r) are premises; (p->r) is the conclusion.
I'm not sure if the question is asking if (~p ∨ q ∨ r) ^ (q ∨ r) = (q->r) If that's the case then the arguments are false. At lease in the case of p=F, q=T, r=F. Am I on the right path?
So the question is basically: Given: (~p ∨ q ∨ r) ^ (q ∨ r) = (q->r) is this true?