Lesson subsection
Read the explanation, try the on-paper prompts, then explain the idea in your own words. Use AI feedback as a mentor, not a shortcut.
Best flow: read → think on paper → write a short explanation → refine with feedback.
Although contradiction is powerful, it is not always the right tool.
Avoid contradiction when:
A direct or contrapositive proof is cleaner. If a simple algebraic argument works, do not complicate it.
The contradiction is manufactured rather than natural. If you must force complicated steps to produce a contradiction, you're using the wrong method.
The negation of the statement is messy. Some statements have negations that introduce unnecessary complexity.
You can construct a direct example or inequality.
Heuristics:
Great problem solvers choose the method that makes the proof shortest and clearest.
TL;DR — key idea
Use contradiction only when it simplifies the argument — not when it complicates it unnecessarily.
Don’t skip this – writing proofs or explanations on paper is where most of the learning actually happens.
Pick any statement from Modules 1–4 and decide which proof technique fits best: direct, contrapositive, or contradiction. Justify *why* your choice is the most natural.
Once you’ve sketched some ideas, summarize the main insight in the reflection box on the right.
In 3–6 sentences, explain the core idea of this subsection as if you were teaching a friend who hasn’t seen it. Focus on the logic, not just the final statements.
AI is optional. Use it to spot gaps and sharpen your wording, not to replace your own thinking.