My teacher has assigned us this exercise as part of our homework:
Give a natural deduction proof of $(\alpha\to\beta)\to(\beta\to\gamma)\to(\alpha\to\gamma)$
Here is an example of natural deduction that he gave us:
$\vdash \alpha\to\beta\to\alpha$.
This is a tautology, but it's easier to prove than to verify:
$\alpha,\beta\vdash\alpha$, hypothesis
$\alpha\vdash\beta\to\alpha$, deduction theorem
$\vdash\alpha\to\beta\to\alpha$, deduction theorem
Here is my attempt:
Hypothesis: $(\alpha\to\beta),(\beta\to\gamma) \vdash (\alpha\to\gamma)$
Deduction thm: $(\alpha\to\beta) \vdash(\beta\to\gamma)\to(\alpha\to\gamma)$
Deduction thm: $\vdash(\alpha\to\beta)\to(\beta\to\gamma)\to(\alpha\to\gamma)$
Is this enough? I feel like I need to take apart the functions inside the parentheses and check those as well, but I don't know how.
Unless you already have that hypothesis, you need to get to that hypothesis first.
Also, (α→β)→(β→γ)→(α→γ) is ambiguous. You almost surely want to prove ((α→β)→((β→γ)→(α→γ))). Additionally, you don't actually use the deduction (meta) theorem, you use the rule of inference that it implies as valid. I'll call this rule "conditional introduction".
I don't know your format exactly or what you have exactly, but a proof might go something like this:
Hypothesis (rule of modus ponens/detachment): (α→β), α $\vdash$ β
Weakening: (α→β), α, (β→γ) $\vdash$ β
Commutation on the left side: (α→β), (β→γ), α $\vdash$ β
Identity: (α→β), (β→γ), α $\vdash$ β, (β→γ)
Detachment: (α→β), (β→γ), α $\vdash$ γ
Conditional introduction: (α→β), (β→γ) $\vdash$ (α→γ)