Question

Question-Directions-Translate each of the following arguments into quantified form and prove that each is valid using natural deduction.

If all store supervisors are wise, then some employees benefit. If there are some store supervisors who are not wise, then some employees benefit. As you can see, either way, some employees benefit. (S, W, E, B)

Answer 1

Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary. Also, I haven’t included anything about sweb as there is no particular information about this acronym.

(Answer) Case A:

Store supervisors are wise

Employees benefit

In this case, the supervisors are sagacious and assume that their employees are just as wise. This is generally like how a thief would be seedy and assume that people around him are also thieves. The thief would be mistrusting because he knows how untrustworthy he is. Similarly, a wise person would automatically assume that the people around them are equally wise. This would mean that a wise supervisor would not micromanage and give the employees a chance to do their own work freely. Under these circumstances, the benefits are that the employees get a work environment where there isn’t any pressure to perform.

Case B:

Supervisors are unwise

Employees benefit

In this scenario, supervisors are unwise about business management and handle their employees the wrong way. They micromanage every single aspect of their subordinates’ work and make sure that the employees perform in a way that seems perfect. Since this is done, the employees make fewer mistakes. When fewer mistakes are made because of fear, the employees earn more commission because of good work and they benefit from such a supervisor.