## Poll on the validity of two arguments

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

## Are these two arguments valid?

1st argument - Valid
4
25%
1st argument - Not valid
3
19%
1st argument - I don't know
1
6%
1st argument - The argument doesn't make sense
1
6%
2nd argument - Valid
4
25%
2nd argument - Not valid
3
19%
2nd argument - I don't know
0
2nd argument - The argument doesn't make sense
0

Speakpigeon
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

### Poll on the validity of two arguments

This is a poll on the validity of the two following arguments.

1st argument
P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.
2nd argument
P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of some part of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of some part of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.
The first one is more simple but their logical structure is partially the same.

Two answers overall, but one answer only for each argument. And you will be able to change your vote later if you want.

Thanks,
EB
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

I didn't vote (yet), as I'm unsure what to vote.

This question seems so easy to answer straight away (they both makes sense), that I'm inclined to believe that I missed something.

A may be the state of B which controls C. So of course A is contributing to the control of C in case A is the state of B.

The same applies to 2nd argument.

What did I miss?
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pm What did I miss?
You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context. Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying.

The whole thing looks like the sort of setup that people sometimes construct to outwit themselves tbh. Once everyone has said how bad both arguments are perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Speakpigeon
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pm I didn't vote (yet), as I'm unsure what to vote.
Take your time. These are formal arguments but couched in ordinary language. Most people are unfamiliar with those, I think.

I'm essentially interested in intuitive replies. Either the argument seems obviously valid or invalid, in which case you can cast a vote. Or you're just unsure. I guess in this case "I don't know" applies, but it's for you to decide.
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pmThis question seems so easy to answer straight away (they both makes sense), that I'm inclined to believe that I missed something.

A may be the state of B which controls C. So of course A is contributing to the control of C in case A is the state of B.
Contributing? Seems to come from left field, that. You need to keep to the argument as it is worded and phrased, otherwise it's a different argument you're looking at. There's no notion of "contributing" anywhere in the argument.
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pmThe same applies to 2nd argument.
I hope you can see that the two arguments, while broadly the same, nonetheless are substantially different.
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pmWhat did I miss?
The idea is definitely not that I should tell you. The arguments are there for you to consider. It's up to you to decide if they are valid or not.
EB
Speakpigeon
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:49 am perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Or the other way around.
EB
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:49 am
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pm What did I miss?
You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context. Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying.

The whole thing looks like the sort of setup that people sometimes construct to outwit themselves tbh. Once everyone has said how bad both arguments are perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Let me phrase it in another way:

If I were to place my vote on "Valid" (for both arguments), how would you argue it is not (as I understand your comment, the arguments are invalid)?
Last edited by philosopher on Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Speakpigeon wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:36 pm Contributing? Seems to come from left field, that. You need to keep to the argument as it is worded and phrased, otherwise it's a different argument you're looking at. There's no notion of "contributing" anywhere in the argument.
Sorry, poor english. I tried to reproduce the argument with my own words.
I shouldn't.
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:49 am
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pm What did I miss?
You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context. Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying.

The whole thing looks like the sort of setup that people sometimes construct to outwit themselves tbh. Once everyone has said how bad both arguments are perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Let me phrase it in another way:

If I were to place my vote on "Valid" (for both arguments), how would you argue it is not (as I understand your comment, the arguments are invalid)?
I would provide you with a Google link because I fear you would never have thought to look for yourself. I might be an arsehole about it and add a snarky comment about somebody choosing to call themselves "philosopher" and needing this assistance, but what's the point? We've both seen how many bullshitters there are on this forum, you're no worse than 20 others tbh.
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:40 pm
philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:49 am
You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context. Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying.

The whole thing looks like the sort of setup that people sometimes construct to outwit themselves tbh. Once everyone has said how bad both arguments are perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Let me phrase it in another way:

If I were to place my vote on "Valid" (for both arguments), how would you argue it is not (as I understand your comment, the arguments are invalid)?
I would provide you with a Google link because I fear you would never have thought to look for yourself. I might be an arsehole about it and add a snarky comment about somebody choosing to call themselves "philosopher" and needing this assistance, but what's the point? We've both seen how many bullshitters there are on this forum, you're no worse than 20 others tbh.
You still haven't argued why the statement does not make sense.

Philosophy is about logic - as is everything in our lives. Its about logic.

You don't understand simple logic. The example provided in the OP makes logically sense, and it is equivalent to 2+2=4.
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Looking at this one:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid.
I would've thought it was the complete opposite - that if the premises are true and the conclusion is true as well, the argument is valid.

Maybe it is because English is not my native language, but in my native language the word "valid" also means sound (as in: "makes sense" or "is true").
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:49 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:40 pm
philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 pm

Let me phrase it in another way:

If I were to place my vote on "Valid" (for both arguments), how would you argue it is not (as I understand your comment, the arguments are invalid)?
I would provide you with a Google link because I fear you would never have thought to look for yourself. I might be an arsehole about it and add a snarky comment about somebody choosing to call themselves "philosopher" and needing this assistance, but what's the point? We've both seen how many bullshitters there are on this forum, you're no worse than 20 others tbh.
You still haven't argued why the statement is not logically valid.

Philosophy is about logic - as is everything in our lives. Its about logic.

You don't understand simple logic. The example provided in the OP is logically valid, and it is equivalent to 2+2=4.
you are working my last nerve. I gave you a link, follow it and learn stuff or remain ignorant. It isn't my job to teach you when you don't even have the most basic understanding. This shit is super simple, all you have to do is put in an absolutely tiny bit of effort when a nice man like me is offering you some fucking assistance.

Validity in philosophy, which I can assure you is what the OP was referring to, is a thing that you don't understand defined by a relationship between premises and conclusions, about which you cannot possibly comment because you are totally oblivious. Once you have read and understood one of the links I have provided via Google, you will realize that neither of those arguments is even remotely valid.

You are nowhere near being able to lecture me to the effect that "Philosophy is about logic", you wouldn't have the slightest idea on that subject, and "as is everything in our lives. Its about logic." is specious bullshit on a good day. Nobody logical would ever write that.
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:00 pm Looking at this one:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid.
I would've thought it was the complete opposite - that if the premises are true and the conclusion is true as well, the argument is valid.

Maybe it is because English is not my native language, but in my native language the word "valid" also means sound (as in: "makes sense" or "is true").
Well I don't know anything about your native tongue, but in this language there are many terms which have both colloquial (everyday) meanings and specific ones for a given knowledge domain.

In English, 'argument' is a very different thing when used in a pub compared to when used by a lawyer or a philosopher. When you argue with a man in a pub, that's just two fat bastards having a disagreement. In philosophy it means something much more structured.

If somebody describes themselves as an idealist on a tinder profile they are using a colloquialism that does no mean they think the universe is composed of ideas rather than physical matter.
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:10 pm
philosopher wrote: Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:00 pm Looking at this one:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid.
I would've thought it was the complete opposite - that if the premises are true and the conclusion is true as well, the argument is valid.

Maybe it is because English is not my native language, but in my native language the word "valid" also means sound (as in: "makes sense" or "is true").
Well I don't know anything about your native tongue, but in this language there are many terms which have both colloquial (everyday) meanings and specific ones for a given knowledge domain.

In English, 'argument' is a very different thing when used in a pub compared to when used by a lawyer or a philosopher. When you argue with a man in a pub, that's just two fat bastards having a disagreement. In philosophy it means something much more structured.

If somebody describes themselves as an idealist on a tinder profile they are using a colloquialism that does no mean they think the universe is composed of ideas rather than physical matter.
Isn't the everyday meaning of the word "valid" = true/makes sense/right?
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

philosopher wrote: Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:15 am Isn't the everyday meaning of the word "valid" = true/makes sense/right?
There is no such thing in everyday language as a valid argument. If you are planning to use the colloquial version of valid, then you must use the colloquial edition of argument which means two fat bastards shouting incoherently at each other.

Irrespective, you asked this question ...
philosopher wrote: Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:33 pm What did I miss?
I told you what you had missed. If you prefer to have conversations about philosophy in which you pay no attention to philosophical practice, and just waffle bout life being logical instead of learning and improving, that will cost you some credibility, which is a shame because you have little to spare.

One of the things that philosophical technique grants you if you learn it instead of bullshitting about it, is a means by which to assess a case presented and spot the ways in which it doesn't work. Those arguments which you think are valid in some fair point sort of way are actually bad under any terminology, philosophical validity is just a means by which to describe that. If you learned this stuff, it is possible that you would gain the ability to present less dreadful arguments in the political philosophy sub.
philosopher
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

### Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:14 pm I told you what you had missed.
No - you didn't.

You said:

"Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying."

But you don't bother to argue why they are not good, and why the second is ridiculous.

If you want a philosophical debate, the least you should do is to argue for your position.