How does one prove $C$ from the premises: $A \leftrightarrow (B \leftrightarrow C)$ and $A \leftrightarrow B$ ?
I've tried to prove $C$ by contradiction, using a sub-proof which presumes $\neg C $, but although I can conclude all of the following in the subproof: $\neg A$, $ \neg B$, $ \neg (B \leftrightarrow C)$, I'm unable to find a contradiction this way.
I've been stuck on this for the whole day, and I think I might be over-thinking the problem.
Note: I want to prove this using the basic first-order logic rules (I'm using the First-Order Logic from the Language, Proof and Logic book).
Due to the transitivity of $\leftrightarrow$ and due to the fact that $A$ comes up on both premises 'at the same level', I find it natural to focus on $A$ and let it act as a pivot of sorts.
Start by proving $A\lor \neg A$ and perform $\lor$-$\text{Elim}$ on this disjunction.
In the first case just use $\leftrightarrow$-$\text{Elim}$ successively on the premises to get $C$.
In the second case (where one starts a subproof with the premise $\neg A$), use the premise $A\leftrightarrow B$ to get $\neg B$ and the premise $A\leftrightarrow (B \leftrightarrow C)$ to get $\neg(B\leftrightarrow C)$ (in both cases by negation introduction).
Now assume $\neg C$, prove $\neg B\leftrightarrow \neg C$ and from this last statement get $B\leftrightarrow C$.
At this point you can find a contradiction allowing you to conclude $C$ in the subproof whose premise is $\neg A$.
I leave the proof below.