Mathematical Logic

Dr Amber Habib
Mathematical Sciences Foundation
St. Stephen’s College
Delhi 110007
 Statements

‘A statement is a sentence which is either true or false, but not both

simultaneously.’

Examples.

• Two plus two equals four.

• Two plus two equals five.

• All apples are red.

1
 Statements 2

• Two plus two equals four.

• Two plus two equals five.

• All apples are red.

The first sentence is obviously true, the second false. The third
is certainly either true or false, although it is not immediately clear
which!

2
 Truth Value

The truth or falsity of a statement is called its truth value, and is

denoted by T and F respectively.

We will use letters such as p, q, r, . . . as shorthand for various state-

ments.

3
 Open Statements

Consider the following sentence:

• The number N is an integer.

Whether this sentence is true or false depends on the value of N .

It is clear that for any choice of N , the sentence is ‘either true or false,
but not both simultaneously.’ Therefore we accept it as a statement.

Statements of this type, whose truth value is variable, are called open
statements.
4
 Open Statements

Consider the following sentence:

• The number N is an integer.

Whether this sentence is true or false depends on the value of N .

It is clear that for any choice of N , the sentence is ‘either true or false,
but not both simultaneously.’ Therefore we accept it as a statement.

Statements of this type, whose truth value is variable, are called open
statements.
4-a
 Open Statements

Consider the following sentence:

• The number N is an integer.

Whether this sentence is true or false depends on the value of N .

It is clear that for any choice of N , the sentence is ‘either true or false,
but not both simultaneously.’ Therefore we accept it as a statement.

Statements of this type, whose truth value is variable, are called open
statements.
4-b
 Open Statements

Consider the following sentence:

• The number N is an integer.

Whether this sentence is true or false depends on the value of N .

It is clear that for any choice of N , the sentence is ‘either true or false,
but not both simultaneously.’ Therefore we accept it as a statement.

Statements of this type, whose truth value is variable, are called open
statements.
4-c
 Compound Statements

Statements can be combined in various ways to obtain new state-

ments. For instance, we start with the sentences:

• Two plus two equals four.

• Two plus two equals five.

Out of these, we can create the following:

5
 Compound Statements 2

• Conjunction: Two plus two equals four and five.

• Disjunction: Two plus two equals four or five.

• Negation: Two plus two does not equal four.

6
 Conjunction

If p and q are statements, their conjunction is denoted p ∧ q . The

symbol ∧ corresponds to the word “and”.

The statement p ∧ q has truth value T if and only if both p and q

have truth value T .

This is also expressed by the following “Truth Table”:

p q p∧q
T T
T F
F F
F T
7
 Conjunction

If p and q are statements, their conjunction is denoted p ∧ q . The

symbol ∧ corresponds to the word “and”.

The statement p ∧ q has truth value T if and only if both p and q

have truth value T .

This is also expressed by the following “Truth Table”:

p q p∧q
T T
T F
F F
F T
7-a
 Conjunction

If p and q are statements, their conjunction is denoted p ∧ q . The

symbol ∧ corresponds to the word “and”.

The statement p ∧ q has truth value T if and only if both p and q

have truth value T .

This is also expressed by the following “Truth Table”:

p q p∧q
T T
T F
F F
F T
7-b
 Conjunction

If p and q are statements, their conjunction is denoted p ∧ q . The

symbol ∧ corresponds to the word “and”.

The statement p ∧ q has truth value T if and only if both p and q

have truth value T .

This is also expressed by the following “Truth Table”:

p q p∧q
T T T
T F
F F
F T
7-c
 Conjunction

If p and q are statements, their conjunction is denoted p ∧ q . The

symbol ∧ corresponds to the word “and”.

The statement p ∧ q has truth value T if and only if both p and q

have truth value T .

This is also expressed by the following “Truth Table”:

p q p∧q
T T T
T F F
F F F
F T F
7-d
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T
T F
F F
F T
8
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T
T F
F F
F T
8-a
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T
T F
F F
F T
8-b
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T T
T F
F F
F T
8-c
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F F
F T
8-d
 Disjunction

If p and q are statements, their disjunction is denoted p ∨ q . The

symbol ∨ corresponds to the word “or”.

The statement p ∨ q has truth value T if and only if at least one of

p, q has truth value T .
This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p q p∨q
T T T
T F T
F F F
F T T
8-e
 Negation

If p is a statement, its negation is denoted ∼ p. The symbol ∼

corresponds to the word “not”.

The statement ∼p has truth value T if and only if p has truth value
F.

This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p ∼p
T
F
9
 Negation

If p is a statement, its negation is denoted ∼ p. The symbol ∼

corresponds to the word “not”.

The statement ∼p has truth value T if and only if p has truth value
F.

This is expressed by the following Truth Table:

p ∼p
T F
F T
9-a
 Connectives

The symbols ∧, ∨, ∼ are called connectives.

They can be used repeatedly to create statements of any complexity,

such as

• p ∧ (q ∧ r) • p ∧ (q ∨ r)

• ∼(p ∧ q) •(∼(p ∧ q)) ∨ (p ∧ (∼r))

Note the use of brackets to clarify the order in which the connectives
are to be applied.

10
 Conditionals

Consider a sentence of the form

• If p then q .

where p and q are statements. It asserts that the truth value of q is

T whenever the truth value of p is T . Thus the sentence is itself a
statement, and we represent it symbolically by

p→q
The symbol → is called the conditional.
11
 Conditionals 2

The Truth Table of p → q is

p q p→q
T T T
T F F
F F T
F T T

Note that this is the same Truth Table as for ∼p ∨ q .

12
 Bi-conditional

The conjunction of the statements p → q and q → p is denoted

p↔q
The symbol ↔ is called the bi-conditional. The Truth Table of p ↔ q
is

p q p↔q
T T T
T F F
F F T
F T F
13
 Statement Forms

Logic is concerned with valid forms of arguments rather than with

the literal truth or falsity of any particular statement. For instance,
the following sequence of statements would be accepted as logically
satisfactory:

If Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal. p→q

Socrates is a man. p
∴ Socrates is mortal. ∴q

But the following is not logically satisfactory:

Socrates is a man. if then Socrates is mortal. p then q

∴ Socrates is mortal. ∴q
14
 Statement Forms

Logic is concerned with valid forms of arguments rather than with

the literal truth or falsity of any particular statement. For instance,
the following sequence of statements would be accepted as logically
satisfactory:

If Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal. p→q

Socrates is a man. p
∴ Socrates is mortal. ∴q

But the following is not logically satisfactory:

Socrates is a man. then Socrates is mortal. p then q

∴ Socrates is mortal. ∴q
14-a
 Statement Forms 2

In order to emphasize form, we treat the symbols p, q, r,. . . as

variables for which any particular statement can be substituted. We
then call them statement variables.

Statement variables can be combined via the connectives ∧, ∨, ∼ and

the conditionals →, ↔ to give more complicated expressions. These
are called statement forms.

15
 Statement Forms 3

We will denote statement forms by capital letters like S. If we wish to

indicate the statement variables involved in S, we will use functional

notation. For instance:

S(p, q, r) = p ∨ (q ∧ (∼r))

16
 Truth Tables

One of the aims of Logic is to analyze how the truth value of a

statement form depends on the truth values of the statement variables
out of which it is constructed.

This information can be displayed via Truth Tables, as we have already

illustrated for the statement forms p ∧ q , p ∨ q , and ∼p.

17
 Truth Tables 2

Here is a more complicated example:

∼(p ∨ q)

p q p ∨ q ∼(p ∨ q)
T T
T F
F F
F T

18
 Truth Tables 2

Here is a more complicated example:

∼(p ∨ q)

p q p ∨ q ∼(p ∨ q)
T T T
T F T
F F F
F T T

18-a
 Truth Tables 2

Here is a more complicated example:

∼(p ∨ q)

p q p ∨ q ∼(p ∨ q)
T T T F
T F T F
F F F T
F T T F

18-b
 Truth Tables 3

Here is another example:

(∼p) ∧ (∼q)

p q ∼p ∼q (∼p) ∧ (∼q)
T T
T F
F F
F T

19
 Truth Tables 3

Here is another example:

(∼p) ∧ (∼q)

p q ∼p ∼q (∼p) ∧ (∼q)
T T F
T F F
F F T
F T T

19-a
 Truth Tables 3

Here is another example:

(∼p) ∧ (∼q)

p q ∼p ∼q (∼p) ∧ (∼q)
T T F F
T F F T
F F T T
F T T F

19-b
 Truth Tables 3

Here is another example:

(∼p) ∧ (∼q)

p q ∼p ∼q (∼p) ∧ (∼q)
T T F F F
T F F T F
F F T T T
F T T F F

19-c
 Logical Equivalence

Two statement forms are logically equivalent (or just equivalent) if

they are always both true or both false. This can be decided by
looking at their Truth Tables.

If R, S are equivalent statement forms, we write

R≡S

20
 Logical Equivalence 2

Example. Consider the statement form ∼(∼p). Its Truth Table is

p ∼p ∼(∼p)
T F T
F T F

Therefore p and ∼(∼p) are equivalent:

p ≡ ∼(∼p)

21
 Logical Equivalence 3

Example. Consider the statement forms ∼(p ∨ q) and (∼p) ∧ (∼q).

We have already worked out their Truth Tables, and we combine that
information below:

p q ∼(p ∨ q) (∼p) ∧ (∼q)

T T F F
T F F F
F F T T
F T F F

Hence the two are equivalent: ∼(p ∨ q) ≡ (∼p) ∧ (∼q)

22
 Tautology

A statement form is called a tautology if it can take only the value

T.

Clearly, all tautologies are logically equivalent.

Example. Consider the statement form p ∨ ∼p. Its Truth Table is

p ∼p p ∨ ∼p
T F T
F T T

Hence p ∨ ∼p is a tautology.
23
 Tautology

A statement form is called a tautology if it can take only the value

T.

Clearly, all tautologies are logically equivalent.

Example. Consider the statement form p ∨ ∼p. Its Truth Table is

p ∼p p ∨ ∼p
T F T
F T T

Hence p ∨ ∼p is a tautology.
23-a
 Contradiction

A statement form is called a contradiction if it can take only the value

F.

All contradictions are logically equivalent.

Example. Consider the statement form p ∧ ∼p. Its Truth Table is

p ∼p p ∧ ∼p
T F F
F T F

Hence p ∧ ∼p is a contradiction.
24
 Contradiction

A statement form is called a contradiction if it can take only the value

F.

All contradictions are logically equivalent.

Example. Consider the statement form p ∧ ∼p. Its Truth Table is

p ∼p p ∧ ∼p
T F F
F T F

Hence p ∧ ∼p is a contradiction.
24-a
 Logic and Sets

Consider a typical statement: ‘The number N is an integer.’

This has the form: ‘The object X has property A,’ with X being a
member of some set (in our example, the set is that of numbers).

A statement of this form immediately leads to the creation of a set

— consisting of those X which do have the property A.

Conversely, every set S creates a statement: ‘X is a member of S.’

Thus there is a correspondence between statements and sets.

25
 Logic and Sets 2

Consider a statement p = ‘X has property A’, where X varies over

a set U . The corresponding set P consists of those X ∈ U which do
have property A.

• If p is a tautology, then every X has property A, so P = U .

• If p is a contradiction, then no X has property A, so P = ∅.

26
 Logic and Set Theory

We just saw a correspondence between the objects of Logic and Set

Theory (statements and sets). This correspondence extends to the
operations of Logic and Set Theory.

Consider two statements:

• p = ‘X has property A’

• q = ‘X has property B’

where X varies over a set U .

Let P, Q be the corresponding sets.

27
 Union and Disjunction

With the notation of the previous slide, we have:

p ∨ q = ‘X has property A or B’

The corresponding set is

{X ∈ U : X has property A or B}
= {X ∈ U : X has property A} ∪ {X ∈ U : X has property B}
= P ∪Q
Therefore the operation ∨ of Logic corresponds to the operation ∪
of Set Theory.
28
 Intersection and Conjunction

The set corresponding to p ∧ q is P ∩ Q. Therefore the operation ∧

of Logic corresponds to the operation ∩ of Set Theory.
Complement and Negation

The set corresponding to ∼ p is P c, the complement of P in U .

Therefore the operation ∼ of Logic corresponds to the operation of
complement in Set Theory.

This correspondence between Logic and Set Theory shows Logic must
follow the same algebraic rules as Set Theory. Thus we can guess
facts of Logic by starting from facts about Sets. These guesses can
be confirmed by Truth Tables.
29
 Important Equivalences

• Idempotent Law: p ∨ p ≡ p ∧ p ≡ p.

• Commutative Law:

p ∨ q ≡ q ∨ p, p ∧ q ≡ q ∧ p.

• Associative Law:

p ∨ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∨ r
p ∧ (q ∧ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∧ r
30
 Important Equivalences 2

• Distributive Law:

p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r)
p ∨ (q ∧ r) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r)

• De Morgan’s Laws:

∼(p ∧ q) ≡ (∼p) ∨ (∼q)

∼(p ∨ q) ≡ (∼p) ∧ (∼q)
31
 Important Equivalences 3

We let t be a tautology and c a contradiction.

Relative to these, the operations obey:

• p ∨ c ≡ p, p ∧ c ≡ c.

• p ∧ t ≡ p, p ∨ t ≡ t.

• p ∨ ∼p ≡ t, p ∧ ∼p ≡ c.
32
 Important Equivalences 3

We let t be a tautology and c a contradiction.

Relative to these, the operations obey:

• p ∨ c ≡ p, p ∧ c ≡ c.

• p ∧ t ≡ p, p ∨ t ≡ t.

• p ∨ ∼p ≡ t, p ∧ ∼p ≡ c.
32-a
 Important Equivalences 3

We let t be a tautology and c a contradiction.

Relative to these, the operations obey:

• p ∨ c ≡ p, p ∧ c ≡ c.

• p ∧ t ≡ p, p ∨ t ≡ t.

• p ∨ ∼p ≡ t, p ∧ ∼p ≡ c.
32-b
 Important Equivalences 3

We let t be a tautology and c a contradiction.

Relative to these, the operations obey:

• p ∨ c ≡ p, p ∧ c ≡ c.

• p ∧ t ≡ p, p ∨ t ≡ t.

• p ∨ ∼p ≡ t, p ∧ ∼p ≡ c.
32-c
 An Application

Absorption Law. p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p.

Proof. The Distributive Law gives:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∧ p) ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q)

Next:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∨ c) ∧ (p ∨ q)
≡ p ∨ (c ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ c ≡ p

33
 An Application

Absorption Law. p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p.

Proof. The Distributive Law gives:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∧ p) ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q)

Next:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∨ c) ∧ (p ∨ q)
≡ p ∨ (c ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ c ≡ p

33-a
 An Application

Absorption Law. p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p.

Proof. The Distributive Law gives:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∧ p) ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q)

Next:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∨ c) ∧ (p ∨ q)
≡ p ∨ (c ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ c ≡ p

33-b
 An Application

Absorption Law. p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p.

Proof. The Distributive Law gives:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∧ p) ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ (p ∧ q)

Next:

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ (p ∨ c) ∧ (p ∨ q)
≡ p ∨ (c ∧ q) ≡ p ∨ c ≡ p

33-c
 Notation and Conventions

• Due to the Associative Law, there is no ambiguity in writing

p∧q∧r or p∨q∨r

34
 Notation and Conventions

• Due to the Associative Law, there is no ambiguity in writing

p∧q∧r or p∨q∨r

• When negation is used without brackets, it is to be applied only

to the statement immediately succeeding it. Thus,

p ∧ ∼q ∧ r is read as p ∧ (∼q) ∧ r
34-a
 Implication

Let R, S be statement forms. We say R logically implies S if the

statement form

R→S
is a tautology.

35
 Implication 2

Example. p ∧ q logically implies p since

(p ∧ q) → p ≡ ∼(p ∧ q) ∨ p
≡ ∼p ∨ ∼q ∨ p
≡ ∼q ∨ (∼p ∨ p)
≡ ∼q ∨ t
≡ t

36
 Argument Forms

An Argument Form is an expression of the type

S 1 , S 2 . . . , SN ; ∴S
where S1, S2, . . . , SN and S are statement forms.

The statement forms S1, S2, . . . , SN are called premises or hypotheses,

while S is the conclusion.

37
 Valid Arguments

An argument form S1, S2 . . . , SN ; ∴ S, is valid if the statement form

(S1 ∧ S2 ∧ · · · ∧ SN ) → S
is a tautology.

Therefore, an argument is invalid if it is possible to assign truth values

to the concerned statement variables such that each premise has truth
value T but the conclusion has truth value F .

38
 Valid Arguments

An argument form S1, S2 . . . , SN ; ∴ S, is valid if the statement form

(S1 ∧ S2 ∧ · · · ∧ SN ) → S
is a tautology.

Therefore, an argument is invalid if it is possible to assign truth values

to the concerned statement variables such that each premise has truth
value T but the conclusion has truth value F .

38-a
 A Valid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → (q → r), q ; ∴ p → r.

Solution 1.

[(p → (q → r)) ∧ q] → [p → r]
≡ ∼[(p → (q → r)) ∧ q] ∨ [p → r]
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ ∼q ∨ r) ∧ q] ∨ [p → r]

39
 A Valid Argument
Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → (q → r), q ; ∴ p → r.

Solution 1. (contd.)

· · · ≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ ∼q ∨ r) ∧ q] ∨ [p → r]
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ r) ∧ q] ∨ [∼p ∨ r]
≡ (p ∧ ∼r) ∨ ∼q ∨ ∼(p∧ ∼r)
≡ t ∨ ∼q ≡ t, so the argument is valid.

39-a
 A Valid Argument 2

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → (q → r), q ; ∴ p → r.
Solution 2. Suppose we have assigned truth values to the statement
variables such that the premises are true. We have to show the
conclusion is also true.

Case I: If p has value F , then p → r has value T , so the conclusion

is true.

Case II: If p has value T , then q → r has value T . Since q also has
value T , r has value T . Again, the conclusion p → r has value T .
40
 A Valid Argument 2

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → (q → r), q ; ∴ p → r.
Solution 2. Suppose we have assigned truth values to the statement
variables such that the premises are true. We have to show the
conclusion is also true.

Case I: If p has value F , then p → r has value T , so the conclusion

is true.

Case II: If p has value T , then q → r has value T . Since q also has
value T , r has value T . Again, the conclusion p → r has value T .
40-a
 A Valid Argument 2

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → (q → r), q ; ∴ p → r.
Solution 2. Suppose we have assigned truth values to the statement
variables such that the premises are true. We have to show the
conclusion is also true.

Case I: If p has value F , then p → r has value T , so the conclusion

is true.

Case II: If p has value T , then q → r has value T . Since q also has
value T , r has value T . Again, the conclusion p → r has value T .
40-b
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 1. We ask if we can assign truth values such that the
premises are true but the conclusion is false.

If the conclusion is false, then p has value F . Then the premise p → q

has value T . If we assign value T to r , then the other two premises
also have value T (regardless of the value of q ).

Therefore this argument form is invalid.

41
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 1. We ask if we can assign truth values such that the
premises are true but the conclusion is false.

If the conclusion is false, then p has value F . Then the premise p → q

has value T . If we assign value T to r , then the other two premises
also have value T (regardless of the value of q ).

Therefore this argument form is invalid.

41-a
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 1. We ask if we can assign truth values such that the
premises are true but the conclusion is false.

If the conclusion is false, then p has value F . Then the premise p → q

has value T . If we assign value T to r , then the other two premises
also have value T (regardless of the value of q ).

Therefore this argument form is invalid.

41-b
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 2.

[(p → q) ∧ (∼q → r) ∧ r] → p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ (q ∨ r) ∧ r] ∨ p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ r] ∨ p ≡ (p∧ ∼q)∨ ∼r ∨ p
≡ p∨ ∼r 6≡ t, so the argument is invalid.

42
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 2.

[(p → q) ∧ (∼q → r) ∧ r] → p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ (q ∨ r) ∧ r] ∨ p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ r] ∨ p ≡ (p∧ ∼q)∨ ∼r ∨ p
≡ p∨ ∼r 6≡ t, so the argument is invalid.

42-a
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 2.

[(p → q) ∧ (∼q → r) ∧ r] → p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ (q ∨ r) ∧ r] ∨ p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ r] ∨ p ≡ (p ∧ ∼q) ∨ ∼r ∨ p
≡ p∨ ∼r 6≡ t, so the argument is invalid.

42-b
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 2.

[(p → q) ∧ (∼q → r) ∧ r] → p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ (q ∨ r) ∧ r] ∨ p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ r] ∨ p ≡ (p ∧ ∼q) ∨ ∼r ∨ p
≡ p ∨ ∼r 6≡ t, so the argument is invalid.

42-c
 An Invalid Argument

Question. Is the following argument form valid?

p → q, ∼q → r, r ; ∴ p.
Solution 2.

[(p → q) ∧ (∼q → r) ∧ r] → p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ (q ∨ r) ∧ r] ∨ p
≡ ∼[(∼p ∨ q) ∧ r] ∨ p ≡ (p ∧ ∼q) ∨ ∼r ∨ p
≡ p ∨ ∼r 6≡ t, so the argument is invalid.

42-d