**(not P ^ (P v Q) => Q** named **Disjunctive Syllogism** formerly known as **modus tollendo ponens** meaning if not P and P or Q then we can conclude Q.

P v Q (if P or Q is true and….

not P (is true)

then Q must be true.

if P = The car is fast

and Q = The car comes in first

Then the compound statement: “If the car is **not** fast **and** (the car is fast **or** the car comes in first) then the car comes in first” is always true.

Suppose that (P) is false, the car is fast

Suppose that (Q) is true, the car comes in first

Then if the car is not fast and (the car is fast or the car comes in first) then we can conclude that the car comes in first. What happened was that the statement the car is not fast removes the statement the car is fast – all that is left is the “the car comes in first” – if that statement is true then the conclusion can only be that it is true that that the car comes in first.

So you might say as a human, wow the car was not first, but it came in first.

3 no namers – logical implications

Hypothetical Syllogism – a logical implication

Disjunctive Syllogism – a logical implication

Simplification – a logical implication

Addition – a logical implication

Modus tollens – a logical implication

Modus ponens – a logical implication

Logical Implications