Question 17 (8 points) Give a semi-formal, but careful, proof of the following argument. By "semi-formal", remember, that means that you can use all the official Fitch rules; and the rules from our official list of shortcuts; but just as in a formal proof, you still need to articulate your steps clearly, and use line numbers where appropriate. If you use any subproofs, be sure to clearly indicate where they start and stop. to prove: ~AxScruffy(x) premises: 1. Ax(Philosopher(x) - WellPaid(x) 2. Philosopher(socrates) 3. Ax(Scruffy(x) -> ~WellPaid(x)) Finally, translate all three premises, and the conclusion, into colloquial English. (You may find it somewhat helpful to do this before attempting the informal proof, in fact.) Question 17 (8 points) Give a semi-formal, but careful, proof of the following argument. By "semi-formal", remember, that means that you can use all the official Fitch rules; and the rules from our official list of shortcuts; but just as in a formal proof, you still need to articulate your steps clearly, and use line numbers where appropriate. If you use any subproofs, be sure to clearly indicate where they start and stop. to prove: ~AxScruffy(x) premises: 1. Ax(Philosopher(x) - WellPaid(x) 2. Philosopher(socrates) 3. Ax(Scruffy(x) -> ~WellPaid(x)) Finally, translate all three premises, and the conclusion, into colloquial English. (You may find it somewhat helpful to do this before attempting the informal proof, in fact.)