Let p, q, r, and s represent simple English sentences. Which of the following best represents? If p then r or s; moreover, if r or s then q
a. (p ?> (r v s)) . ((r v s) ?> q)
b. p ?> (r v s) v (r v s) ?> q
c. ((p ?> (r v s) ?> q)
d. ((p . ((r v s) ?> q))
a
You might also like to view...
From the eighteenth century onwards, philosophy has become increasingly specialized
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
Identify any fallacies in the following passage either by naming them or, where they seem not to conform to any of the patterns described in the text, by giving a brief explanation of why the fallacious reasoning is irrelevant to the point at issue.Cheryl is deciding which of the girls who are rushing her sorority she wants most to join. Pearl and Maria are trying to convince Cheryl that Debra is the best of the rushees and that Cheryl should vote for Debra when the time comes."Debra has a wonderful personality, and she'll fit right in," Pearl says. "All the other sisters are going to vote for her.""And she'll be really hurt if you don't support her," Maria points out. "She thinks you like her a lot.""Besides," Pearl says, "she and I are very close. She's just about the best friend I ever
had." What will be an ideal response?
For Anaximander, the source of all reality
a. cannot be described. b. is hot and dry. c. is cold and wet. d. is cold and dry.
The language “under God” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 during the Cold War,
an era when the country was particularly alarmed by atheistic communism. Michael Newdow is an avowed atheist with a daughter in the elementary school of Elk Grove Unified School District in California. He objected to the school district’s requirement that his daughter say the Pledge including “under God,” as he considered that government establishment of religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. His challenge reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which dismissed his claim on a technicality that did not reach this central issue. (The technicality was that Newdow did not have the legal “standing” to raise this issue in the courts.) The issue remains an important one to many people. Some of the justices of the Court indicated that they would not have found this language “under God” a First Amendment violation if they had reached that question. One justice said that the words “under God” do not constitute “a prayer, nor an endorsement of any religion,” but rather “a declaration of belief in allegiance and loyalty to the United States flag and the Republic that it represents.” Another said that this language is an “idiom for essentially secular purposes,” and that it is acceptable to “commemorate the role of religion in our history.” One justice observed that language such as “In God we trust” on our currency is just a reflection of “ceremonial deism” that does not establish any particular religion.
What will be an ideal response?