Is this argument logically valid?A squid is not a giraffe
A giraffe is not an elephant
An elephant is not a squid
Joe is either a squid or a giraffe
Joe is an elephant
Therefore, Joe is a squid
Either way, please articulate why.
EB
Is this argument logically valid?A squid is not a giraffe
A giraffe is not an elephant
An elephant is not a squid
Joe is either a squid or a giraffe
Joe is an elephant
Therefore, Joe is a squid
There's a couple of things to say here but I won't comment on that unless you vote first. Valid or not?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 3:05 am
The first four premises are logically valid in relation to each other but not the last premise or conclusion
Is the argument logically valid?Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:22 am OK, so apparently no one on this forum is competent enough or has enough logical sense to even articulate why he thinks the argument is valid or invalid.
Even though it is a simple argument.
That sort of explains why most posters here exclusively post bullshit.
EB
This is my thread.
So what?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 11:35 am The last two premises contradict each other so the argument is invalid
And here is what you yourself say of validity:An argument is usually said to be logically valid if all cases in which the premises are true, the conclusion is also true.
Or, equivalently, an argument is said to be valid if there is no case in which the premises are true and the conclusion is false.
So, how does that justify your answer?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:09 am A valid argument is one where the conclusion is true in relation to the premises but only within the context of the argument and nothing else
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:57 pmSo what?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 11:35 am The last two premises contradict each other so the argument is invalid
Here is the definition of validity broadly accepted in "classical" mathematical logic:And here is what you yourself say of validity:An argument is usually said to be logically valid if all cases in which the premises are true, the conclusion is also true.
Or, equivalently, an argument is said to be valid if there is no case in which the premises are true and the conclusion is false.So, how does that justify your answer?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:09 am A valid argument is one where the conclusion is true in relation to the premises but only within the context of the argument and nothing else
EB
So what? And,
Just like I did, in this thread.
Or, there are other things in play here.Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:48 pm So, either you think you know the answer and you just vote before posting any comment, or you don't have a view and you can go play in the courtyard.
Or, I can just ask you a simple question in this thread. If you do not like to answer it, then so be it but some could then say; so apparently someone on this forum is not competent enough or has enough logical sense to even articulate why they think the argument is valid or invalid.Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:48 pmAnd if you want to know what I think, you can start your own thread and see what happens.
EB