The document discusses rules of inference for prepositions and quantifier groups. It defines rules of inference as syntactical transform rules used to infer a valid conclusion from a premise to create an argument. A complete set of rules can infer valid conclusions while avoiding invalid ones. It provides an example of a valid argument involving propositions, denoting "if p then q", "p", therefore "q" with symbols. It also mentions that fallacies resemble rules of inference but are based on contingencies rather than tautologies.

1. RULES OF INFERENCE FOR
PREPOSITIONS AND QUANTIFIER
GROUP FELLOWS:
Aqsa Rehman(17581556-023)
Rabia Zafar(17581556-045)
Mubaraka Nazeer(17581556-037)
Khawaja Rizwan(17581556-011)

2. Rules of inferenceare syntactical transform rules which one
can use to infer a conclusion from a premise to create an argument. A set
of rules can be used to infer any valid conclusion if it is complete, while
never inferring an invalid conclusion.
PRIMESIS:
It is basically the set of statements. Mathematical logic is
often used for logical proofs. Proofs are valid arguments that determine the
truth values of mathematical statements. An argument is a sequence of
statements. The last statement is the conclusion and all its preceding
statements are called premises .

3. Valid Arguments in Propositional Logic
Consider the following argument involving propositions (which, by definition, is a
sequence of
propositions):
"If you have a current password, then you can log onto the network."
"You have a current password."
Therefore,
"You can log onto the network."
P->q
p
: . q
where .
'
. is the symbol that denotes "therefore."

4. Fallacies
Several common fallacies arise in incorrect arguments. These fallacies
resemble rules of inference but are based on contingencies rather than
tautologies. These are discussed here to show the distinction between
correct and incorrect reasoning.
EXAMPLE
Suppose "If you have password then you login to system”
You have password