Pattern-chaser wrote:...the ability to "think or argue in a logical manner".I can agree with this.
...with the key word here being "logical" - which means 1) valid structure and 2) true premises.
Can we agree with this?
The Philosophy Forums at OnlinePhilosophyClub.com aim to be an oasis of intelligent in-depth civil debate and discussion. Topics discussed extend far beyond philosophy and philosophers. What makes us a philosophy forum is more about our approach to the discussions than what subject is being debated. Common topics include but are absolutely not limited to neuroscience, psychology, sociology, cosmology, religion, political theory, ethics, and so much more.
This is a humans-only philosophy club. We strictly prohibit bots and AIs from joining.
Pattern-chaser wrote:...the ability to "think or argue in a logical manner".I can agree with this.
Pattern-chaser wrote:[Reason is] the ability to "think or argue in a logical manner".
”RJG” wrote:[I agree.] The key word is "logical" - which means 1) valid structure and 2) true premises.
”Pattern-chaser” wrote: Aristotle is a philosopher.Yes, the argument is logically (mathematically) "valid", but is logically "unsound".
All philosophers are women.
Therefore, Aristotle is a woman.
This is a logically valid argument, which is incorrect by virtue of reason...
Pattern-chaser wrote:— the second premise is factually incorrect, therefore the conclusion drawn is invalid.Yes, the second premise is false, and
”Pattern-chaser” wrote:With factually correct premises, the argument will always lead to a valid conclusion.No, "validity" is not determined by the trueness of the premises, it is determined by its mathematical structure.
”Pattern-chaser” wrote: Aristotle is a philosopher.
All philosophers are women.
Therefore, Aristotle is a woman.
This is a logically valid argument, which is incorrect by virtue of reason...
RJG wrote: ↑April 11th, 2023, 10:52 am Yes, the argument is logically (mathematically) "valid", but is logically "unsound".Exactly as I said. We are quibbling over the definition and use of the word "reason", and whether the word "logic" includes reason, or appears alongside it. This stems from the historic meaning of "logic", that I am using, and the contemporary accepted meaning, which is your choice. Let these be my final words in this exchange:
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 11th, 2023, 9:33 am As I said some posts ago, this is a semantic difference, unworthy of further consideration.
”Pattern-chaser” wrote: With factually correct premises, the argument will always lead to a valid conclusion.
RJG wrote: ↑April 11th, 2023, 10:52 am No, "validity" is not determined by the trueness of the premises, it is determined by its mathematical structure.You misunderstand me. I meant to refer to the argument whose logical structure we have already examined, and found to be valid. If true and correct premises are inserted into such an argument, the conclusion is guaranteed to be valid and correct.
How is God Involved in Evolution?
by Joe P. Provenzano, Ron D. Morgan, and Dan R. Provenzano
August 2024
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023
All sensations ,pain, perceptions of all kinds h[…]
If you haven't already, you can sign up to be per[…]