Trevor Adam, the grader and TA, has office hours 1:30-2:45 MW for you in Room 121 in the Philosophy Department. I have posted provisional office hours on my main page, still subject to change..
Solutions will be posted for this by Monday of finals week. Our final is 12-2 on Wednesday. You are welcome to ask questions on Friday in class or at my office hour on Friday, or by email.
Here is the sample final with solutions. Errors in anything I post are quite possible: please email me promptly if you find an error in the sample final (or in the solutions when I post them).
9.8A: 8 (use RAA I think); 11, 17
Here are my solutions to the test.
9.5 part B: 2,3,6,9,11 part D 2, 6, 12, 16, 22. These are all translations; no proofs in this round.
Willard v.O. Quine, On What There Is
Happy reading! I am hoping to devote a day or two to discussion of issues raised in these papers (and they do raise some issues in formal logic which we haven't considered yet, notably equality or identity); in a philosophy class we ought to do something clearly recognizable as philosophy at some point. So what is your opinion of "the present king of France", or "the round square"? That is just one issue: there is a lot to be found in these articles. You might think about whether either or both of these articles raises questions you might want to investigate further in other resources and/or write something about.
section 9.3 part G 6, 8, 9, 10; section 9.4 part D 2, 5, 8, 10. I'm giving you the extra day so you can ask me about the problems you run into with symbolization as well as proof: use it!
section 9.3 A 3,6,9,12,15; B: 2,4,6,8; F: 3,6,9; section 9.4: 5,6,12,20
The only new rule you get from my lecture is QN: we have not finished discussing UG, so do not use it. You can use all earlier rules, including UI, EG and EI. You are entirely free to use CP and RAA.
The next assignment will have real uses of UG from 9.3 and 9.4.
I have chosen these problems because on my reading they do not require UG. But notice that if I am wrong about one or more of them (or if you can't see how to avoid using UG), I did show in class how to use EI and RAA instead of UG.
9.4 part A: 3,5,8,11. part B: 2,5
What happened on the eleventh day of the eleventh month, at the eleventh hour? Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it...
section 9.3 part E problem 4, even numbered problems from 8 to 20.
You are allowed to use CP or RAA, but try to see if you can do the proof without them.
9.1 section B 2,3,5,12,14,15;
9.2: section A 2,8,9,17,20; section B 3,5,9,14
section 8.6: part A problems 2,6,14,17; part B problems 2,3; part C 4,8.
section 9.1: part C 5,6,9,12,14,20; part F 2,6,8,11,18
Here is a sheet of propositional logic rules and strategies which will be attached to your test. Please review it for typos. I hope the page of strategies at the end might be useful. Requests for other things on the formula sheet will be considered.
Here is a full sample Test II. I can't say for certain how it compares with the one you will have, but working it out will be suitable to prepare you for the test. I will post at least partial solutions for it sometime during the weekend (here are the solutions). I will also be willing to answer questions about it (somewhat more willing to do so fully in office hours than in the classroom).
I will announce lab hours in Mathematics 136 when you can seek help with the computer assignment (or of course with questions about the test). Tuesday morning I am still feeling unwell, and not coming in, but I will have the review material posted before noon.
We will be lecturing new material on Wednesday and Friday, but I have plans to discuss some examples from the 8.4 homework (and I am sure I will develop a desire to discuss some examples from the 8.5 homework) on those days, and I will take questions from the review material, though not for entire periods.
Here is the Python version of the theorem prover, if you want to use it. It has syntax differences in its logical language which I will point out in class, and the commands have slightly different format. If you turn in your lab using Python, just mail me the Python file with your commands at the end.
8.5 part A 3,5,12,15,24 (notice that in part A you are not allowed to use CP; proofs using CP will not get full credit); part B (3,4) (6,7) (notice that these are to be done in pairs) (here you may use RAA or CP to prove validity); part C 2,4 (here again you are not to use CP)
Some formal conditional proofs: Section 8.4: 2,6,11,12,15
and some English arguments to be turned into formal proofs (not necessarily all conditional): 8.1 part E 2,5; 8.3 part E 2,5; 8.4 part B: 3,4 8.4 part C: 1,2
8.3 part A 2,3,5,6,11 ; part B 3,14,18 ; part C 2,3,11
7.4 part C problems 5,6,7 Each of these is valid. What I want you do to is indicate the order in which you determine truth values in the way I demonstrated in class (number the truth values you enter in the order in which you write them down), so that I can see in your work how you arrived at a conflict. If you missed my explanation in class, I'll be happy to do another example or two on Monday.
8.4: I had to write my own problem set, a link to which now appears here. It's a penalty for having done things in a peculiar order. Here are the 8.4 problems (some actual problems from 8.4 will appear in a future assignment).
8.2: part A, 3,5,8; part B, 8,11,18; part C 2,5,11
section 7.5 part D problems 5 and 8 (these are both the annoying sort of problem which is so simple that it might be hard);
In all parts of 8.1, remember that you are allowed to use hypothetical syllogism and constructive dilemma as well as the rules I explicitly listed. section 8.1 part A 3,5,9; part B 5,6,8 (careful!),9,14; part C 2,6,8,15; part D 2,3,5
Section 7.4: part B 2,3,5 part C 1,2,3 part D 6,10 part E 2,5
Section 7.5: part A: 5, 20 part B: 2,3,5
This "assignment" is very large and the point is not to do more of it than you need for test review. You are free to ask for solutions to any of these problems (I am more likely to give them in my office than in class, but I might give them in class), and your grade will be a check mark if you turn in a paper by Monday the 21st.
1.1 Part C 3, 11, 14; Part D 2, 6, 9, 14. I want justifications as well as answers: I suggest Venn diagrams to illustrate validity or invalidity of categorical arguments.
1.2 Part C 9, 12; Part D 5, 9
1.3 Part A 4, 14; Part B 6, 14 17
1.4 Part C: 6,11,14 Part D: 3,6
2.1 Part A 11,20
7.1 Part C 5,12,14; Part D 15,18,20
7.2 Part C 2,5,8 (other aspects of 7.2 covered by 7.3 exercises)
7.3 Part B 3,6,9,12,15,18. 7.4 Part E (dont use abbreviated truth tables, use 7.3 method) 2,6,8
7.3 Part A 2,3,8,9,17,20; Part C all even numbered problems.
7.1: part C 4, 6, 9, 11, 18 part D 2, 5, 6, 9, 14
7.2: part A 3-24 by threes: just say true or false; part A will be 5 points for the whole set; part B 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 15 In each part, show your analysis of the sentence into atomic statements, the logical form of the sentence and how you evaluate it; part C 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 (give some indication of how you found your answers).
1.2: part B 2,6,8,12,14; part C: 2,5,6,8,9
These problems don't require extra remarks, but they do require you to write down logical forms.
1.3: part A 9,14,15,18; psrt B: 3,6,8,18 Notice that in each of these problems you need to construct your own example argument with the same logical form in which the premises are clearly true and the conclusion is false. Be sure to clearly explain if your example involves some background assumptions.
The homework is just from 1.4 and 2.1. It is due on Friday Sept. 4.
Attention to 1.4 and 2.1 for the next lecture would be a good idea. I might possibly get into 1.2.
Please read sections 1.1, 1.4, 2.1 in the book for Wednesday.
You might want to take a look at the very useful web tutor for this course at this URL, which is so useful for problems in the book that I think it will have a material effect on how I assign and grade homework in the course!