I have a question about the use of Double Negation in relation to this problem I found in my textbook examples.
Problem:
- $\;¬(r \land t) \lor u$
- $\;r \land t$
Therefore, $u$.
In my textbook it says it used the double negation and then followed by the Rule of Disjunctive Syllogism. I understand that we have to turn premises 1 and 2 into premises that can be used with disjunctive syllogism, but I don't know the STEPS taken using double negation to get it into the form to be used with disjunctive syllogism. Help is much needed! I really can't figure out how double negation was employed here.
Best Answer
$\;\lnot (r \land t)\lor u,\;$ (premise)
$\;r\land t,\;$ (premise)
$\lnot \lnot (r \land t)$ from $(2),\;$ (double negation)
$\therefore \;u\;$ (disjunctive syllogism)