The logical implication associates to the right. Assume its two antecedents, then use nested applications of the disjunction elimination rule.
1  | P ∨ Q                              assume
2  | | P ∨ ¬Q                           assume
3  | | | P                              first case of 1
4  | | | P                              available from 3
5  | | | Q                              second case of 1
6  | | | | P                            first case of 2
7  | | | | P                            available from 6
8  | | | | ¬Q                           second case of 2
9  | | | | ⊥                            ¬-elim, 5 and 8
10 | | | | P                            ⊥-elim, 9
11 | | | P                              ∨-elim, 2, cases 6–7 and 8–10
12 | | P                                ∨-elim, 1, cases 3–4 and 5–11
13 | (P ∨ ¬Q) → P                       →-intro, discharge 2–12
14 (P ∨ Q) → ((P ∨ ¬Q) → P)             →-intro, discharge 1–13

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.