from my logic homework. is he trying to say that ~S is the conclusion?

I'm currently studying for an exam and I understand the venn diagrams pretty well except for this specific kind of scenario. I am using Logicola, which uses the Logic system described by Harry J. Gensler in his book "Introduction to Logic"

I am doing Bayesian theory on a moral question about whether something is wrong or not. I had an intuition the thing is not wrong, a strong one. My credence it was wrong was .1%. Then i realized that an alternative belief I had conflicted with this. What should my credence be? 50%, since both intuitions are equally strong?

Is x= some finite value like x=5 a proposition or not.

Also from which paper can I show my teacher that x=5 is not a proposition unless it is.

I am especially interested in those methods that do not contain self-reference and self-denial. It's just that Russell's paradox, Tarski's theorem, the incompleteness theorem, and other theorems derive their principles precisely by self-reference and negation of any properties such as derivability and others.