It Ain’t Necessarily So

Teaching Philosophy 24 (3):253-254 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper points out a recent error that has been occurring in logic and critical thinking textbooks concerning the definition of a deductively valid argument. Namely, a number of authors define a deductively valid argument as one where the conclusion must be true if the premises are true. This definition is mistaken as it attaches necessity to a statement (the conclusion) rather than to the relationship between premises and the conclusion. In addition to detailing this mistake in a number of textbooks, the paper provides three correct definitions of a valid argument.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,880

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

It ain’t necessarily so.Hilary Putnam - 1962 - Journal of Philosophy 59 (22):658-671.
It Ain't Necessarily So.Nomy Arpaly - 2018 - Oxford Studies in Metaethics 13.
It ain't necessarily so: Basic sequent systems for negative modalities.Ori Lahav, Marcos, João & Yoni Zohar - 2016 - In Lev Beklemishev, Stéphane Demri & András Máté (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic, Volume 11. CSLI Publications. pp. 449-468.
It ain't necessarily so: Gravitational waves and energy transport.Patrick M. Duerr - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 65:25-40.
Logical Consequence.J. C. Beall, Greg Restall & Gil Sagi - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
64 (#335,758)

6 months
9 (#528,587)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references