Question

1.
[(F v R). (Q = L)] > [Sv (r. M)]
[Sv (r. M)]
[(F v R). (Q = L)]

Answer 1

This argument is invalid because the premises do not logically lead to the conclusion. The conclusion is simply a repetition of the first premise and does not follow from the second premise. The argument lacks coherence and fails to establish a clear relationship between the premises and the conclusion. Therefore, we cannot accept the conclusion as a logical consequence of the premises.