I'm following a YouTube tutorial on propositional logic, but have noticed the following well formed formula example and I'm struggling to make sense of it: $$ \lnot [(A \lor B) \equiv (E\supset C)] $$
How should this be interpreted. At the moment - and I know this isn't right - I'm interpreting it is:
- A or B is not equivalent to C if E is true.
- So, C is not equivalent to A or B if E is true.
But I'm struggling with the $(A \lor B)$ being equivalent to C if E. It doesn't make sense to say A or B is equivalent to C, nor does the reverse seem right that C is equivalent to A or B.