Hey guys, just a bit confused with this question. I'm not sure exactly how the answer should be given:


Express the following argument in symbolic form using logical connectives. Be careful to define any notation you introduce:

"1) If I earn some money then I will go for a holiday this summer.
 2) I will either go for a holiday or work this summer.

 3) Therefore, if I don't go for a holiday this summer then I will not have earned any money and will be working"

What I got so far:

let p = "I earn some money"
and q = "I go away for holiday this summer"
and r = "I work this summer"

then by the first statement: $(p\rightarrow q)$
by the second statement: $(q\lor r) \land \lnot(q \land r)$ (exclusive or)

I've yet to fully work out the third statement, but my question is the answer given by three different statements in symbollic form or am I supposed to somehow combine it?

edit: What would be the third statement? would it be $\lnot(q \rightarrow p)\land r$?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, three different statements. Also, no mention of "exclusive or" so don't add it... just $$ q \vee r$$ $\endgroup$ – GEdgar Apr 27 '11 at 12:49
  • $\begingroup$ but $(q\lor r)$ means q OR r. the statement states either q or r, but not both hence exlusive or $\endgroup$ – Arvin Apr 27 '11 at 12:57

The inclusive vs. exclusive or issue is often one translating natural language to symbolic logic. You have to decide which "or" the natural language means. I think in this case I would agree with exclusive, but that is not a mathematical problem. You have represented the exclusive or correctly. For the third statement, I would see it as $\lnot q \rightarrow (\lnot p\land r)$, seeing the "then" as grouping the last two phrases. I'm sure both of the translation decisions can be argued both ways.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.