Logic class....can anyone help?

Question: I have a question about from my philosophy / Logic class!.!.!.!.can anyone help!?

ok, we are working on truth tables for arguments in philosophy class!. There is one question that has everyone stumped!. Here is the symbolic form of the argument!.

B// ( B v A )

I need to know if this is valid or invalid from using a truth table!.!.!.!.!.!.is there any philosophy majors out there!? LOLWww@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

B// ( B v A )

I'm assuming that the above symbolization is representative of a argument with 'B' as the premise and 'B v A' as the conclusion!.

P: B
C: B v A

If so, then yes, this is a valid argument!.

B!.!.!.//!.!.!.(B v A)
T!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.T!.!.T!.!?
F!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.F!.!?!.!?

When using a truth table to test for validity, an argument is valid so long as there is no horizontal line with all true premises and a false conclusion!. Here, there is no such line - so the argument is valid!. The first line has both a true premise and a true conclusion, while the second line has a false premise so it would not be possible for that line to have all true premises and a false conclusion!.

The rule that supports this inference is called disjunction introduction (sometimes called addition)!.

In English, it is easy to see why this rule holds in bivalent classical logic:

Suppose it is true that you have blue eyes,

Then it is also true that you have blue eyes or auburn hair!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

im a phil major!. i'd help you but you're a dirty girl!. Www@QuestionHome@Com