Difference between revisions of "Validity"
From Wiki @ Karl Jones dot com
Karl Jones (Talk | contribs) (crit think) |
Karl Jones (Talk | contribs) (Discussion) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In [[logic]], an [[argument]] is '''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. | In [[logic]], an [[argument]] is '''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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Discussion == | ||
It is not required that a valid argument have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion. | It is not required that a valid argument have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion. | ||
Revision as of 13:05, 30 August 2015
In logic, an argument is 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.
Discussion
It is not required that a valid argument have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion.
A formula is valid if and only if it is true under every interpretation, and an argument form (or schema) is valid if and only if every argument of that logical form is valid.
Etymology
From Latin validus, from valeō ("I am strong, I am healthy, I am worth").
