query: Proving the validity of an argument
positive_passages.docid: 149643
positive_passages.text: Stuck on validation of argument using rules of inference
negative_passages.docid: 21391
negative_passages.text: Proving Functions are Surjective
negative_passages.docid: 77286
negative_passages.text: Proving set theory question
negative_passages.docid: 120517
negative_passages.text: Is it possible to prove that a particular statement cannot be disproved without creating a contradiction?
negative_passages.docid: 116527
negative_passages.text: Validating a proof for necessary and sufficient conditions on sets A & B such that $P(A) \cup P(B) = P(A\cup B)$
negative_passages.docid: 109685
negative_passages.text: An invalid argument, the conclusion of which is a tautology
negative_passages.docid: 51877
negative_passages.text: Why is this 'Proof' by induction not valid?
negative_passages.docid: 31299
negative_passages.text: Using the Fitch system, how do I prove $((p \implies q) \implies p)\implies p$?
negative_passages.docid: 98537
negative_passages.text: What is wrong with the proof?
negative_passages.docid: 45193
negative_passages.text: prove or supply counter example about graph
negative_passages.docid: 141814
negative_passages.text: Proofs using theorems instead of axioms
negative_passages.docid: 141496
negative_passages.text: Could someone make the proof into a hinted exercise?
negative_passages.docid: 109858
negative_passages.text: How could a statement be true without proof?
negative_passages.docid: 20462
negative_passages.text: Validity of conditional statement when the premise is false.
negative_passages.docid: 29325
negative_passages.text: Maximum Proof (Average?)
negative_passages.docid: 143248
negative_passages.text: What approach should I take to establish this logical proof?
negative_passages.docid: 32509
negative_passages.text: Proving a statistic is ancillary