Philosophy Now 22:22-23 (1998)
|Abstract||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)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Christopher Gauker (1990). Semantics Without Reference. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31 (3):437-461.
Peter B. M. Vranas (2011). New Foundations for Imperative Logic: Pure Imperative Inference. Mind 120 (478):369 - 446.
Michael J. Wreen (2007). A Second Form of Argument From Analogy. Theoria 73 (3):221-239.
G. Albrecht-Buehler (1976). Numerical Evaluation of the Validity of Experimental Proofs in Biology. Synthese 33 (1):283 - 312.
Author unknown, Validity and Soundness. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Agustín Rayo & Timothy Williamson (2003). A Completeness Theorem for Unrestricted First-Order Languages. In Jc Beall (ed.), Liars and Heaps. Oxford University Press.
Christopher Menzel (1998). Logical Form. In Edward Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #291,386 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?