Quoted By:
>None of these propositions seem equivalent to the initial one. Is this correct, or am I retarded?
Correct. "p implies r" is equivalent to "either not-p or r, or both".
(p or q) & (not-p or r) can't be further simplified, so none of the answers are correct. In a nutshell, the truth values of p, q, and r are all relevant; the easiest way to see this is to try to find a simplified equivalent with either q or r being false.
>people saying q or r
Consider p true, q true, r false
p or q is true
p implies r is false
whole statement is false
but q or r is true
