Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    Logical Validity Can at Least Roughly Be Defined As The Property An Argument (A Set of Sentences Among Which

    Uploaded by

    Michellene Tadle
    Logical validity is defined as an argument having premises that, if true, necessitate the conclusion also being true. An argument is logically valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. However, this is only a rough definition, as it fails to account for arguments with necessary or impossible premises or conclusions. A more technical definition of logical validity examines an argument's form to determine if that structure necessarily leads from the premises to the conclusion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Logical Validity Can at Least Roughly Be Defined As The Property An Argument (A Set of Sentences Among Which

    Uploaded by

    Michellene Tadle
    9 views1 page
    Logical validity is defined as an argument having premises that, if true, necessitate the conclusion also being true. An argument is logically valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. However, this is only a rough definition, as it fails to account for arguments with necessary or impossible premises or conclusions. A more technical definition of logical validity examines an argument's form to determine if that structure necessarily leads from the premises to the conclusion.

    Original Description:

    Philosophy

    Original Title

    Logical Validity

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Logical validity is defined as an argument having premises that, if true, necessitate the conclusion also being true. An argument is logically valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. However, this is only a rough definition, as it fails to account for arguments with necessary or impossible premises or conclusions. A more technical definition of logical validity examines an argument's form to determine if that structure necessarily leads from the premises to the conclusion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    9 views1 page

    Logical Validity Can at Least Roughly Be Defined As The Property An Argument (A Set of Sentences Among Which

    Uploaded by

    Michellene Tadle
    Logical validity is defined as an argument having premises that, if true, necessitate the conclusion also being true. An argument is logically valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. However, this is only a rough definition, as it fails to account for arguments with necessary or impossible premises or conclusions. A more technical definition of logical validity examines an argument's form to determine if that structure necessarily leads from the premises to the conclusion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Logical validity can at least roughly be defined as the property an argument (a set of sentences among which

    one is designated as the conclusion and the others as premises) has if it satisfies the following condition: if the
    sentences are true, then the conclusion has to be true as well. In other words, an argument is logically valid if it
    is in principle impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
    (This is only a rough definition because, though useful for grasping the general notion of validity, it is technically
    incorrect. Specifically, it runs into trouble when dealing with necessary or impossible sentences. For example,
    say you had the following argument:

    Madrid is in Spain.

    Red apples are gross.

    Therefore, 2+2=4.

    Even though the premises clearly are unrelated to the conclusion, and certainly don't show that it's true, the
    conclusion is necessarily true all on its own. It's easy to see that this isn't a logical argument, and so not
    something we'd want to class as valid. The rough definition of validity given above would classify it as valid; but
    the more technical definition of validity used by logicians would not because the form of the argument,

    Therefore, C

    is not valid. But, as discussed below, validity is a property of an argument's logical structure.

    You might also like