Explore Westonci.ca, the premier Q&A site that helps you find precise answers to your questions, no matter the topic. Experience the ease of finding reliable answers to your questions from a vast community of knowledgeable experts. Discover detailed answers to your questions from a wide network of experts on our comprehensive Q&A platform.
Sagot :
There isn’t a law of logic here, because neither the conclusion |3|=3 nor the introduction of anything else justifies it.
The first clause has the following structure: For all x, if A(x), then B(x).
The second statement would be an example of Modus ponens, preceded by Universal instantiation, if it said "|3|=3, hence 3 is positive."
Instead, the second clause states, "x=3 so A(3)." We could read that as an attempt to assert the consequent by saying, "3 is positive, thus A(3)," but that would be a fallacy. To express "if and only if," we would need to make the first sentence stronger.
To know more about the law of logic visit https://brainly.com/question/14523081?referrer=searchResults
#SPJ4
We appreciate your time. Please revisit us for more reliable answers to any questions you may have. We hope our answers were useful. Return anytime for more information and answers to any other questions you have. Thank you for trusting Westonci.ca. Don't forget to revisit us for more accurate and insightful answers.
