A.

Give examples of or tell why no such example exists:

1. A false implication with a false conclusion.

-A false implication with a false conclusion cannot exist, since a false implication with a false
conclusion would result in a true implication.

3. A true implication with a false conclusion.

P: If you are going to study. *P is true and Q is false. Therefore, the

implication is true.
Q: Then you will have a bad grade.

-If you are going to study, then you will have a bad grade.

5. A false implication with true hypothesis.

P: If you are doing great. *P is false and Q is true. Therefore, the

implication is false.
Q: Then you will be sad.

-If you are doing great, then you will be sad.

C. Give the truth values of the following. Assume that P is true, Q is false, and R is true.

1 1. 𝑝 → (𝑞 → 𝑟)

p q r (q→r) p→(q→r)
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1
0 1 1 1 1
0 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 1

1 3.𝑝 ∧ (𝑞 → 𝑟)

p q r (q→r) p∧(q→r)
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1
0 1 1 1 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 1 0
 1 5.(𝑝 → 𝑞) ⟷ (~𝑞 → ~𝑝)

p q ~p ~q p→q ~q→~p (p→q)⟷(~q→~p)

1 1 0 0 1 0 1
1 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 0 1 1 1
0 0 1 1 1 1 1

1 7.[𝑝 → (𝑞 ∧ 𝑟)] ⊕ [𝑝 ∧ (𝑞 → 𝑟)]

p q r (q∧r) [p→(q∧r)] (q→r) [p∧(q→r)] [p→(q∧r)]⊕[p∧(q→r)]

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

1 9.(𝑝 ∨∼ 𝑞) ∧ (𝑞 → 𝑟)

p q r ~q (p∨∼q) (q→r) (p∨∼q) ∧(q→r)

1 1 1 0 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 1 1 1

D. Write the converse, contrapositive and inverse of each of the following implications.

1. If a number has a factor of 2, then it has a factor 4.

Converse: If it has a factor of 4, then a number has a factor of 2.

Contrapositive: If it doesn’t have a factor 4, then the number doesn’t have a factor of 2

Inverse: If the number doesn’t have a factor of 2, then it doesn’t have a factor 4.
E. By examining
truth tables, determine
whether each of the
following is a tautology, a contingency, or an absurdity.

TAUTOLOGY 1.(∼ 𝑝 ∧ 𝑞)⨁(𝑞 → 𝑝)

q ∼p (∼p∧q) (q→p) (∼p∧q)⨁(q→p)

1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 1 1
1 1 1 0 1
0 1 0 1 1

TAUTOLOGY 3.(𝑝⨁𝑞) ↔ (~𝑞⨁~𝑝)

p q ~p ~q (p⨁q) (~q⨁~p) (p⨁q)↔(~q⨁~p)

1 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 1 1 0 1 1 1
0 0 1 1 0 0 1

CONTINGENCY 5. (𝑝 → 𝑞)⨁(𝑞 → 𝑝)

p q (p→q) (q→p) (p→q)⨁(q→p)

1 1 1 1 0
1 0 0 1 1
0 1 1 0 1
0 0 1 1 0

TAUTOLOGY 7.[(𝑝 ↔ 𝑞) ↔ 𝑟] ↔ [𝑝⨁(𝑞⨁𝑟)]

p q r (p↔q) [(p↔q)↔r] (q⨁r) [p⨁(q⨁r)] [(p↔q)↔r]↔[p⨁(q⨁r)]

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
CONTINGENCY 9.(∼ 𝑟⨁𝑝) ∧ (𝑝 ↔ 𝑞)

p q r ∼r (∼r⨁p) (p↔q) (∼r⨁p)∧(p↔q)

1 1 1 0 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 1 1 0 1 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 1 1