Below are basic arguments in English. Choose one argument and translate the argument into the symbolism of Predicate Logic. Refer to the translation chart on page 481 of your text for help translating. Then, Use one of the Indirect proof techniques combined with Rules of Inference and Equivalence from Chapter 8 to demonstrate the validity of the argument.
Next, construct an alternate proof. In other words, if the proof was done using RAA, now use CP; if you used CP, now use RAA. Consider the following questions, as well, in your journal response:

Will a direct proof work for any of these (ie. a proof that doesn’t rely on making assumptions as CP and RAA do)?
Can the proof be performed more efficiently by using different Equivalence rules?

Argument:
There are rights that cannot be waived. But alienable rights can be waived. It follows that some rights are inalienable. (Rx: x is a right; Wx: x can be waived; Ax: x is an alienable right)