1. Translate the argument into the symbolism of Predicate Logic. ...

1. Translate the argument into the symbolism of Predicate Logic. 

 

There is an entity that is more powerful than all entities. Therefore, at least one entity is more powerful than itself. (Mxy: x is more powerful than y)

 

2. Use the Indirect proof techniques (RAA)  combined with Rules of Inference and Equivalence to demonstrate the validity of the argument.

 

3. Use the Indirect proof technique (CP) combined with Rules of Inference and Equivalence to demonstrate the validity of the argument.
 

4. Will a direct proof work for any of these (ie. a proof that doesn't rely on making assumptions as CP and RAA do)?

 

5. Can the proof be performed more efficiently by using different Equivalence rules?