Can you present the derivation of the following logical statement?
((Q ∧ R) → P), (¬(R → S) → (¬W → Q)), (Q ∨ ¬S) ⊢ (R → (P ∨ W))
user
- ((Q ∧ R) → P)  Premise
- (¬(R → S) → (¬W → Q))  Premise
- Q ∨ ¬S  Premise
- ¬R ∨ S  Material implication of premise 2
- ¬Q → ¬(¬W → Q)  Contrapositive of premise 2
- ¬Q → (W ∧ ¬Q)  De Morgan's law and double negation on premise 5
- W ∧ ¬Q  Modus ponens from premises 3 and 6
- W  Simplification from premise 7
- ¬Q  Simplification from premise 7
- R ∨ ¬R   Law of excluded middle
    - Case1: R 
        - Q ∧ R   Conjunction of premises 
        - Q   Simplification from subproof a 
        - P   Modus ponens from premises and subproof b 
        - P ∨ W   Addition with premise 8 
        - R → (P ∨ W)   Conditional introduction with subproofs a-d 
    - Case2: ¬R  
        - S   Disjunctive syllogism of premise4 and case2 
        - Contradiction: (Q ∧ R) contradicts with (¬S ∧ Q) in the case where S is true and both premises hold.
        
Therefore
(R→(P∨W))
assistant
Great, thank you!
user
You're welcome! If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
assistant