Incorrect Answer.
The "proof"
|
|
1 p q r |
premise |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
2 q r |
assumption |
 |
 |
|
3 q |
e1 2 |
 |
 |
|
4 p |
e 1, 2 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
5 p q |
i 2-4 |
|
contains several conceptual flaws:
- It employs the right global stragety: use
-introduction to show the implication
p
q. However, this requires that we
assume p in line 2. If
-introduction is
the last proof rule we intent to use, and if our proof begins as in the
first two lines above, there is no way that this can ever type check!
Moreover, the formula in line 4, the conclusion of the box, would have to
be q, and not p, for
-introduction to
work.
- Notice also that the application of
-elimination in line 4 does not type
check. Although its arguments type check well, the rule's conclusion has
to be q
r, the conclusion of the
cited implication in line 1, and not p.
Back to Question.
Next Question.