HomeAn argument can be valid without necessarily being true, and vice versa. How is this possible? What are some examples of this?
2 posters
Truth and Validity
JakeS- Admin
- Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-02-15
Age : 34
Chris_Lane- Posts : 43
Join date : 2009-02-13
Age : 44
I don't recall reading this but I am assuming it is because the premise of the argument is false.
Example:
All dogs are vicious, therefore Buddy (a dog) is vicious.
The argument is valid because the scope of the premise is sufficiently broad to cover the inference. However the argument is false because it is founded on a false premise???
Example:
All dogs are vicious, therefore Buddy (a dog) is vicious.
The argument is valid because the scope of the premise is sufficiently broad to cover the inference. However the argument is false because it is founded on a false premise???
JakeS- Admin
- Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-02-15
Age : 34
It's all a part of knowing the distinction in definition between a truth and validity in logic.
An argument that is true is simply one that is rooted in objective fact.
A valid argument, however, is merely one that if all its premises are true, will lead to a true conclusion.
An argument that is true is simply one that is rooted in objective fact.
A valid argument, however, is merely one that if all its premises are true, will lead to a true conclusion.
Similar topics
