# LMD Async Tutoring

**URL:** <https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933>\
**Category:** Tutoring\
**Created:** [April 23, 2024, 12:05am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933 "2024-04-23T00:05:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 363

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![LMD](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/lmd/32/3213_2.png) [@LMD](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/LMD)\
**Post date:** [July 12, 2024, 2:44am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933/363 "2024-07-12T02:44:23Z")

</div>

> [@Eternity Async Tutoring](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/eternity-async-tutoring/1932/276):
>
> There’s a way to use {and, or, not} to construct any logic function with any number of inputs and any truth table. Being able to do this shows that {and, or, not} is universal. There’s one general-purpose method that always works.
> 
> Try to figure out what it is, but maybe give up after 10 minutes and I’ll give you a hint.

Is this the method I’ve already used, that I gleaned from Eternity’s approach to a previous problem, namely, or’ing together all of the true input scenarios and representing the input scenarios as the respective combination of true and false inputs anded together? I’ve found this has so far worked with everything I’ve tried.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/lmd-async-tutoring/1933)._