PhilArchive
open access
Working Backwards with Copi's Inference Rules
In their Introduction to Logic, Copi and Cohen suggest that students construct a formal proof by "working backwards from the conclusion by looking for some statement or statements from which it can be deduced and then trying to deduce those intermediate statements from the premises. What follows is an elaboration of this suggestion. I describe an almost mechanical procedure for determining from which statement(s) the conclusion can be deduced and the rules by which the required inferences can be made. This method is designed to forestall the quandary in which many beginners find themselves: not knowing how to get started.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Knowledge and suberogatory assertion#774033
- Towards Counterfactual Explanation and Assertion Inference for CPS Debugging#2684
- Reasoning and Deducing#94561
- Basic Conditional Reasoning: How Children Mimic Counterfactual Reasoning#747606
- A Formal Characterization of Semantic Pollution of Modal Proof Systems#718341
Record · ID 116212
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive