Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 example of a valid (and sound) argument is given by the following well-known syllogism:
As the study of argument is of clear importance to the reasons that we hold things to be true, logic is of essential importance to rationality. Arguments may be logical if they are "conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity", [1] while they are rational according to the broader requirement that they are based on reason and knowledge.
The philosophical position that there is only one correct logic or logical system that accurately captures the principles of valid reasoning. [177] logical operator A symbol or function in logic that applies to one or more propositions, producing another proposition that expresses a logical operation such as negation, conjunction, or disjunction.
Logical reasoning is a form of thinking that is concerned with arriving at a conclusion in a rigorous way. [1] This happens in the form of inferences by transforming the information present in a set of premises to reach a conclusion.
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 ...
A valid logical argument is one in which the conclusion is entailed by the premises, because the conclusion is the consequence of the premises. The philosophical analysis of logical consequence involves the questions: In what sense does a conclusion follow from its premises? and What does it mean for a conclusion to be a consequence of premises ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
For valid arguments, the logical structure of the premises and the conclusion follows a pattern called a rule of inference. [12] For example, modus ponens is a rule of inference according to which all arguments of the form "(1) p , (2) if p then q , (3) therefore q " are valid, independent of what the terms p and q stand for. [ 13 ]