According to the following truth table, how should the formula ((p & q) $\rightarrow$ ~q) be characterized? $$\begin{array} { | c | c | c | c | c | }
\hline p & q & ( p \& q ) & - q & ( p \& q ) \rightarrow - q ) \
\hline T & T & T & F & F \
\hline T & F & F & T & T \
\hline F & T & F & F & T \
\hline F & F & F & T & T \
\hline
\end{array}$$
A) Contingent
B) Inconsistent
C) Disjunction
D) Tautology
E) Bi-Conditional

Question

According to the following truth table, how should the formula ((p & q) $\rightarrow$ ~q) be characterized? $$\begin{array} { | c | c | c | c | c | } 
\hline p & q & ( p \& q ) & - q & ( p \& q ) \rightarrow - q ) \
\hline T & T & T & F & F \
\hline T & F & F & T & T \
\hline F & T & F & F & T \
\hline F & F & F & T & T \
\hline
\end{array}$$
A) Contingent
B) Inconsistent
C) Disjunction
D) Tautology
E) Bi-Conditional

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The formula is contingent because its truth value varies depending on the truth values of the variables $p$ and $q$. It is not always true (not a tautology) nor always false (not a contradiction), and it does not describe a relationship of equivalence (not bi-conditional) or a disjunction.

According to the Following Truth Table, How Should the Formula →\rightarrow→

According to the Following Truth Table, How Should the Formula $\rightarrow$