Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
If also the premises of a valid argument are proven true, this is said to be sound. [3] The corresponding conditional of a valid argument is a logical truth and the negation of its corresponding conditional is a contradiction. The conclusion is a necessary consequence of its premises. An argument that is not valid is said to be "invalid".
An argument, more fully a premise–conclusion argument, is a two-part system composed of premises and conclusion. An argument is valid if and only if its conclusion is a consequence of its premises. Every premise set has infinitely many consequences each giving rise to a valid argument. Some consequences are obviously so, but most are not ...
An argument is sound and its conclusion logically follows (it is true) if and only if the argument is valid and its premises are true. An argument is valid if and only if it is the case that whenever the premises are all true, the conclusion must also be true. If there exists a logical interpretation where the premises are all true but the ...
Validity is defined in classical logic as follows: An argument (consisting of premises and a conclusion) is valid if and only if there is no possible situation in which all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. For example a valid argument might run: If it is raining, water exists (1st premise) It is raining (2nd premise)
A logical fallacy where the conclusion of an argument is assumed in the premise, making the argument circular. Bew See provability predicate. BHK-interpretation The Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov interpretation, a constructivist interpretation of intuitionistic logic, where the truth of a statement is equated with the existence of a proof for it. bias
An argument is formally valid if and only if the denial of the conclusion is incompatible with accepting all the premises. In formal logic, the validity of an argument depends not on the actual truth or falsity of its premises and conclusion, but on whether the argument has a valid logical form.
The rule is valid with respect to the semantics of classical logic (as well as the semantics of many other non-classical logics), in the sense that if the premises are true (under an interpretation), then so is the conclusion. Typically, a rule of inference preserves truth, a semantic property. In many-valued logic, it preserves a general ...
An argument for psychologism is based on the idea that logic is a sub-discipline of psychology: it studies not all laws of thought, but only the subset of laws corresponding to valid reasoning. [85] Another argument focuses on the thesis that we learn about logical truths through the feeling of self-evidence, which is in turn studied by ...