Teaching Validity with a Stanley Thermos

Philosophy Now 22:22-23 (1998)
I know that it is difficult for some students to distinguish the truth of premises from the validity of an argument. They think that a valid argument has all true statements, and an invalid one a false premise. Clearly, the teaching of validity requires introducing the idea of an argument form, for it is the form which is the vehicle of validity, not what is put in the form. An argument form does not contain statements (but statement forms), so there is nothing in the form to be true or false. Yet the form has the property of validity, which is the property of truth preservation. This is to say that a valid form will never allow the premise forms to be filled with true statements and the conclusion form to be filled with a false statement.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI philnow1998/1999229
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 15,904
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

2 ( #533,844 of 1,725,443 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #349,420 of 1,725,443 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.