In exercises 11-12, use all the premises to determine the valid conclusion for the given argument.1. If it is a theropod, then it is not herbivorous. If it is not herbivorous, then it is not sauropod. It is a sauropod. Therefore,2. If you buy the car, you will need a loan. You do not need a loan or you will make a monthly payments. You buy the car. Therefore,Important note: please make solutions TYPEWRITTEN and NOT HANDWRITTENUse the given lesson attached as reference LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.3In exercises 1-6, determine whether the argument is valid or invalid by comparing its symbolicform into standard forms. For each valid argument, state the name of its standard form.1. If you take Art 151 in the fall, you will be eligible to take Art 151 in the spring. You were noteligible to take Art 152 in the spring. Therefore, you did not take Art 151 in the fall.2. He will attend Stanford or Yale. Hi did not attend Yale. Therefore, he attended Stanford.3. If I had a nickel for every logic problem I have solved, then I would be rich. I have notreceived a nickel for every logic problem I have solved. Therefore, I am not rich.4. If it is a dog, then it has fleas. It has fleas. Therefore, it is a dog.5. If we serve salmon, then Vicky will join us for lunch. If Vicky will join us for lunch, then Marilynwill not join us for lunch. Therefore, if we serve salmon, Marilyn will not join us for lunch.6. If I go to college, then I will not be able to work for my Dad. I did not go to college. Therefore,I went to work for my Dad. STANDARD FORMSArguments can be shown to be valid if they have the same symbolic form as anargument that is known to be valid. For instance, we have shown that the argumenth-mhamis valid. This symbolic form is known as direct reasoning. All arguments thathave this symbolic form are valid.Table 4.1 Standard Form of Four (4) Valid ArgumentsDirect Reasoningp-qPAqContrapositiveReasoningp-q-9p-q-9-pTransitive Reasoning Disjunctive Reasoningg-rr-mNote that transitive reasoning can be extended more than two (2) conditional premises. Say, ifwe have p→q, q→r, and r→s then a valid conclusion for the arguments is p→s.Example 4.3Use standard form to determine a valid conclusion for the following arguments.1. If Kim is a lawyer (p), then she will be able to help us (q).Kim is not able to help us (-p).Therefore:Solution: The symbolic form of the premises isIf they had a good time (g), they will return (r).If they return (r), we will make more money (m).Therefore:p-qSolution: The symbolic form for the premises isq-r-p-rThis matches the standard form known as contrapositive reasoning. Thus the valid conclusionis -p (Kim is not a lawyer.)p-qqAPppvq-PAqTable 4.2 Standard Form of Two (2) Invalid ArgumentsOn the other hand, this matches the standard form called transitive reasoning thus, the validconclusion is gm (If they had a good time, they will make more money).Fallacy of the Converse Fallacy of the Inversepvq-q-pp-qPAny argument that matches either of the two forms as illustrated is invalid.

Question

Accepted Answer

To Determine:
 The valid conclusion for the given argument.