Thursday, July 20, 2017

Invalid Argument--From Charles Turek on Anne Lehmann's rules about syllogisms

An invalid argument would be one where the premises are true and the conclusion must be false. A valid argument is one in which the true premises lead inevitably to a true conclusion.

Other arguments are either true or false in conclusion from true premises, Turek writes on the Internet.

Contradictory premises or self-contradiction, unsound or conflicting premises, unsound conclusions: do these logical failings destroy the moderate arguments of the moderate logician. Probably yes more than no, but not always.

Traditional logic and the Law of Identity do not always trump the logical laws governing our population.

Moderate syllogisms may be a blend of validity, invalidity, soundness, unsoundness, contradictory statements in the chain of reasoning, and skips in the structure of thinking being laid out, and yet the argument as a whole and the conlusion may be true and meaningful--occasionally.

No comments:

Post a Comment