I'm being asked to prove that if $k∈ \Bbb Z$, $k+1>k$. Judging from our instructions, it appears (I am unsure) as though I cannot use the law of induction to solve this. A hint gives that the proof depends on $1∈\Bbb N$. I was thinking of approaching this by using if $k∈\Bbb N$ then $x+k∈\Bbb N$. Problem is, we were not given $k∈\Bbb N.$ Is this solvable without induction?
We are given associativity, commutivity, and the identity elements for addition and multiplication, the additive inverse, the properties of $=$, and basic set theory and logic.
Order for the integers is given by Let $m,n,p∈\Bbb Z$. If $m<n$ and $n<p$, $m<p$.
Also assumed, and possibly relevant is if $x∈\Bbb Z$, then $x∈\Bbb N$ or $-x∈ \Bbb N$ or $x=0$.
As stated in the comments, the answer may depend to some extent on what set of axioms for the integers you are using; it also depends on the exact definition of $"a>b"$. But under most axiomatizations, assuming that $"a>b"$ is defined as $"(a-b)\in \mathbb{N}"$ (where $\mathbb{N}$ is the set of positive integers), something like the following proof by contradiction would work:
$[(k+1)\ngtr k]~~~ \equiv~~~~ [(k+1)-k \notin \mathbb{N}]~~~$(definition of $a>b$)
$\implies~~~ [(1+k)-k \notin \mathbb{N}]~~~$ (commutativity of addition)
$\implies~~~[1+(k-k) \notin \mathbb{N}]~~~$ (associativity of addition)
$\implies~~~[1\notin \mathbb{N}]$
Note that $1\in\mathbb{N}$ is often not part of the axioms of the integers, and in general must itself be proved. The original question suggests it has "already" been proved, so here we can take it as a given. Otherwise, a rough outline of the proof that $1\in\mathbb{N}$ would be (under most axiomatizations of the integers, such as the one here, that I particularly like):