00:01
So we have that we want to determine whether the given argument is valid or invalid.
00:06
We have if and so wishes, then bill will be the president.
00:10
Manuel is a public defender or bill will be the president.
00:15
We have that manuel is not a public defender, therefore, anne does not so wish.
00:21
So we can break this down into our different events.
00:23
A, let's say is anne wishes.
00:31
B is bill.
00:33
Is president c is manuel is public defender it's a pd for short so our first sentence i'll call sentence one is a therefore b the sentence the second sentence manuel is a public defender or bill will be president is a implaus or not a excuse me that gives bill is president implies that manuel is not a public defender and manuel is a public defender implies that bill is not president and then the last we have that manuel is not a public defender so we're given that we're in the state of mbar and essentially we're trying to the statement is is that m bar, therefore, not a.
01:57
So, the problem is, at this basis of a, therefore b, if anne wishes, then bill is, then bill will be the president.
02:11
But we have that this is a one -way implication.
02:18
So, anne -wish, therefore bill president.
02:28
But bill president.
02:35
Oh, actually, it's not even a problem on that basis.
02:46
We have that bill, or we have that anne wishing means that bill must be president...