Assertion: argument's premise | /r/HasProperty | true
Facets:
value: with the conclusion
type: OTHER
value: clearly
type: DEGREE
value: both
type: DEGREE
value: after all
type: TEMPORAL
value: on those occasions
type: TEMPORAL
value: simultaneously
type: MANNER
value: as the truth-table shows
type: OTHER
value: on the first
type: TEMPORAL
value: in arguments of this form
type: OTHER
value: such as was a bylaw
type: OTHER
value: under a given interpretation
type: OTHER
value: for the conclusion
type: PURPOSE
Source sentences:
text: You start from a basic statement or “premise,” and as long as that premise is true there is no logical way for the conclusion to be false.
text: If one assumes the premises to be true (ignoring their actual truth values), would the conclusion follow with certainty?
text: If we assume the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily, and thus it is a valid argument.
text: the premises to be true (ignoring their actual truth values), would the conclusion follow with certainty?
text: If we assume the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily, and thus it is a valid argument.
text: If all the premises of a valid deductive argument are true, then its conclusion must be true.
text: In other words, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if all the premises are true.
text: In other words, the truth of the conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises—if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.
text: If an argument is valid, it is a valid deduction, and if its premises are true, the conclusion must be true: a valid argument cannot have true premises and a false conclusion.
text: This can be done by giving a counter example of the same form of argument with premises that are true under a given interpretation, but a conclusion that is false under that interpretation.
text: The conclusion of a valid argument is not necessarily true, it depends on whether the premises are true.
text: : Valid argument; if the premises are true the conclusion must be true.
text: : Valid argument; if the premises are true the conclusion must be true.
text: (This does not mean the conclusion has to be true; it is only true if the premises are true, which they may not be!)
text: (This does not mean the conclusion has to be true; it is only true if the premises are true, which they may not be!)
text: Invalid argument, as it is possible that the premises be true and the conclusion false.
text: An inductive argument is said to be cogent if and only if the truth of the argument's premises would render the truth of the conclusion probable (i.e., the argument is strong), and the argument's premises are, in fact, true.
text: (i) B believes that the premise ( that is, Mary is John’s sister) is true, B thinks this belief is justified, and the premise is B’s reason for maintaining the conclusion.
text: For a valid argument, it is not possible for the premises to be true with the conclusion false.
text: That is, necessarily if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true.
text: In a deductive argument, validity is the principle that if all the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
text: If both premises in a syllogism are true and the reasoning process from one part of the syllogism to the other is valid, the conclusions will be proven.
text: If both premises in a syllogism are true and the reasoning process from one part of the syllogism to the other is valid, the conclusions will be proven.
text: However, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is also true, as a matter of logic."​​
text: You can use the concept of the premise in countless areas, so long as each premise is true and relevant to the topic.
text: Further, if the premises are true, the conclusion, in any way, must also be true.
text: Inductive argument is one where the premises are supposed to support the conclusion such that the conclusion is likely to be true if the premises are true.
text: The most reliable forms of logic are modus ponens, modus tollens, and chain arguments because if the premises of the argument are true, then the conclusion necessarily follows.
text: An argument is considered to be successful (or valid ) when the premises are true (or believable) and the premises support the conclusion.
text: However, it should be noted that whether or not an argument is "valid" does not depend on whether its premises are true.
text: It rather depends on whether the conclusion follows from them, which is to say, on whether under the assumption that the premises are true, the the conclusion must be true as well.
text: A simple logical analysis will not reveal the error in this argument, since that analysis assumes that all the argument's premises are true.
text: Thus the argument is valid and has only true premises.
text: The argument is in fact valid, so we next check whether the premises are true.
text: If an argument is valid, then if its premises are true, its final conclusion must also be true.
text: If an argument is sound, then it is valid and has only true premises.
text: Unless the premises of an argument are all true, we would have no reason to accept to accept its conclusion.
text: The premise is true, and the argument is valid, because the conclusion does follow from the premise!
text: Here, plausibility is a matter of having good reasons for believing that the premises are true.
text: A good argument is an argument that is either valid or strong, and with plausible premises that are true, do not beg the question, and are relevant to the conclusion.
text: The conclusion of this argument is true, so some or all the premises are true.
text: Think about whether the premises are true, and whether they support the conclusion that it is morally acceptable to eat meat.
text: One might argue that this requirement is too stringent, because we seem to accept many arguments as good arguments, even if we are not completely certain that the premises are true.
text: In other words, it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false.
text: As you can see, if the premises are true (and they are), then it simply isn't possible for the conclusion to be false.
text: This is an argument in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion in such a way that if the premises are true, it is improbable that the conclusion would be false.
text: In this example, even if both premises are true, it is still possible for the conclusion to be false (maybe Socrates was allergic to fish, for example).
text: It does not matter whether the premises or conclusion are actually true for an argument to be valid.
text: Similarly, an argument with a necessary conclusion can in no situation have all true premises and a false conclusion, since there is no situation in which the conclusion is false.
text: An argument with the conclusion 'The premises are all true.' is also valid.
text: Both premises in this argument are true, but the conclusion is false.
text: The premises in this argument are true but clearly, the conclusion is false.
text: This argument is also invalid because it does not disprove the premise; if the premise is true, then source A may be a hypocrite or even changed their mind, but this does not make the statement less credible from a logical perspective.
text: It is valid because if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true.
text: Given that the Kalam cosmological argument is a deductive argument, if both premises are true, the truth of the conclusion follows necessarily.
text: Remember that an argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: If either of these possibilities is true, then both premises could be true, but the conclusion would be false.
text: Hence, it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false.
text: Can the premises be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: The example of Professor Simpson shows us how it would be possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: If the premises are true, then we have a good argument.
text: In example 1, about David and Matt, if we accept that both premises are true, it could be that these two examinations were casually seen in the cinema.
text: He argues that there is no theory of invalidity—no systematic way to show that an argument is invalid other than to show that it has true premises and a false conclusion (1981, 164).
text: If there was some independent way of knowing whether the major premise was true, such as that it was a bylaw that only old Etonians could be committee members, the argument would be a serious one, and not beg the question.
text: The form of the syllogism is valid (modus tollens), and the premises are true.
text: For an argument to be sound, it must be valid, and its premises must all be true.
text: A premise might be true, but it might not be reasonable to believe that premise.
text: For an argument to be sound, it must be valid, and the premises must be true.
text: 5) For an argument to be deductively strong, it must be a deductive argument (i.e. if all the premises are true, the conclusion necessarily follows).
text: For an argument to be inductively strong, it must be an inductive argument (i.e. if all the premises are true, the conclusion likely follows).
text: It is not concerned with whether the premises are true or whether the argument is strong or valid, i.e., whether the premises actually support the conclusion as the author intends them to do.
text: Once we have taken apart such an argument and laid its structure out so that we can clearly see it, we can ask whether the premises are true and whether they really provide (probable or necessary) support for the intermediate or final conclusions.
text: (By "hypothetical argument" I mean an argument one of whose premises is "supposed" or hypothesized so as to see what would have to be true, or would likely be true, if it were true.)
text: An argument is called sound if and only if it is valid and all its premises are true.
text: Here all the premises are true and the argument is valid.
text: Because, to know an argument to be sound we must know that all its premises are true.
text: An argument in the propositional calculus is valid whenever it is a substitution-instance of an argument form in which it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
text: In arguments of this form, both premises are true on the first and on the third lines of the truth-table.
text: Since it is therefore possible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false, the inference is invalid.
text: As the truth-table shows, the premises are true only when both of the component statements are false, in which case the conclusion is also true.
text: Despite its greater size, this truth-table establishes validity in exactly the same way as its more compact predecessors: both premises are true only on the first, fifth, seventh, and eighth lines, and the conclusion is also true on each of these lines.
text: Whenever the premises are true (on the third line of the truth table), so is the conclusion.
text: In this case, the first line of the truth-table shows that (with our inclusive sense of the) it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
text: Assuming arguendo allows an attorney to examine the conclusions of premises without admitting that these premises—often the asserted facts of the opposing party—could be true.
text: The premises are plausible, that is, must have good reason to believe that the premises are true.
text: To say the conclusion follows necessarily means that if the premises are true the conclusion must also be true.
text: Or, to put it differently, it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: Unless we accept some very unusual possibilities -- ie, the gun went off by itself; Mr. Watson's pet dog picked up the gun in his mouth and caused the gun to fire -- it would seem that the lawyer has presented an argument in which it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: Arguments in which it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time are valid arguments.
text: The term "valid" then is reserved only for arguments in which the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises, that is, if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
text: He or she would readily admit that the premises could be true and the conclusion still be false at the same time, and that the conclusion probably follows from the premises.
text: In other words, it is unlikely (though not impossible) for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: Rather, we are saying simply that it it IS possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.)
text: To determine that an argument is valid or strong, is to maintain that IF the premises are true, then the conclusion either must be true (in valid arguments) or probably true (in strong arguments).
text: A valid argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: A strong argument is one in which it is nearly impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false at the same time.
text: Both the argument and all its premises must be true for a statement to be true.
text: Invalid arguments fail in achieving this goal EVEN IF the premises are true.
text: Arguments where the goal (to achieve strong and reliable beliefs) is to provide the best available evidence for the conclusion; the nature of the inferential claim is such that it is unlikely that the premises are true and the conclusion false.
text: But the premises would have to all be true for the conclusion to be conclusive.
text: This point can be expressed also by saying that, in a deductive argument, the premises are intended to provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false.
text: However, we have been given no information that would enable us to decide whether the two premises are both true, so we cannot assess whether the argument is deductively sound.
text: An argument is valid if the premises can’t all be true without the conclusion also being true.
text: An argument is valid if it would be inconsistent for all its premises to be true and its conclusion to be false.
text: This last argument, if its premises are known to be true, is no doubt good enough for a jury to convict John, but none of these three arguments about John committing the murder is strong enough to be called “valid,” at least not in the technical sense of deductively valid.
text: When such a proof is given by a mathematician, and when all the premises are true, then the conclusion follows necessarily.
text: And since thus one cannot know the primary premises, knowledge of the conclusions which follow from them is not pure scientific knowledge nor properly knowing at all, but rests on the mere supposition that the premises are true.
text: In classical logic, an argument is (deductively) valid if its conclusion follows from its premises -- if it is impossible for its premises to be true and its conclusion false.
text: This argument is of the form modus tollens, and is logically valid: If its premises are true, the conclusion follows of necessity.
text: The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
text: Premise 4 is true by virtue of the Principle of Excluded Middle: what explains the existence of the contingent being either are solely other contingent beings or includes a non-contingent (necessary) being.
text: If conditions are not jointly sufficient, is there reason to think that premise 1 is true?
text: Why should one think premise (6) is true—that a beginningless series, such as the universe up to this point, is an actual rather than a potential infinite?
text: A deductive argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false.
text: An inductive argument is one in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion in such a way that if the premises are true, it is improbable that the conclusion would be false.
text: Deductive arguments are those meant to work because of their pattern alone, so that if the premises are true the conclusion could not be false.
text: All other arguments are considered to be inductive (or just non-deductive), and these are meant to work because of the actual information in the premises so that if the premises are true the conclusion is not likely to be false.
text: When the premises are in fact true and the argument is valid, then we call it sound.
text: In logic, more precisely in deductive reasoning, 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.
text: It is not required for a valid argument to have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion.
text: No matter how the universe might be constructed, it could never be the case that these arguments should turn out to have simultaneously true premises but a false conclusion.
text: In order for a deductive argument to be sound, the argument must be valid and all the premises must be true.
text: The Manipulation argument works only if the second premise is true, and the second premise says that there is no relevant difference between Victim (in this case, Ernie) and any normal deterministic case of apparently free and responsible action (in this case, Bert).
text: Premise (3) is clearly true.
text: ”, then the premises of the argument are true (since even if \(S\) tried to change the laws or the past, she would not succeed), but the conclusion is false (since determinism is consistent with the truth of counterfactuals like “if \(S\) tried to raise her hand, she would”).
text: A deductive inference succeeds only if its premises provide such absolute and complete support for its conclusion that it would be utterly inconsistent to suppose that the premises are true but the conclusion false.
text: If the premises of a valid argument are true, then its conclusion must also be true.
text: (Considering the premises as a set of propositions, we will say that the premises are true only on those occasions when each and every one of those propositions is true.)
text: Any deductive argument that is not valid is invalid : it is possible for its conclusion to be false while its premises are true, so even if the premises are true, the conclusion may turn out to be either true or false.
text: It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
text: Of course, if the original premise is true then there is no point in arguing as any opposition by definition is non valid since it did not open the dialog.
text: It is the second premise that makes no sense if the original premise is true, because no opening argument need be made in order for an opposing argument to see that it is an opening argument and by definition the only valid argument made.
text: Thus, the premise must original premise must be false, but the second premise is clearly true leaving the conclusion in a state of illogic.
text: The premise itself may be either true or false but never wrong.
text: Because informal reasoning regularly deals with hypothetical reasoning and with premises for which there is great disagreement about whether they are true or false, many researchers would relax the requirement that every premise must be true.
text: The audience is not going to be persuaded by an otherwise good argument with true premises unless they believe those premises are true.
text: In deductive reasoning, an argument is "valid" when, assuming the argument's premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
text: If the argument is valid and the premises are true, then the argument is "sound".
text: Instead, an argument is "strong" when, assuming the argument's premises are true, the conclusion is probably true.
text: If the argument is strong and the premises are true, then the argument is "cogent".
text: That is, the conclusion must be true if the premises are true.
text: All premises are true and conclusion follows from the premises during sound and valid arguments.
text: Invalid : premises may be true but conclusion does not follow from them.
text: : premises may be true but conclusion does not follow from them.
text: all premises are true and conclusion follows from the premises.
text: : all premises are true and conclusion follows from the premises.
text: This is a good argument because if the premises were true the conclusion would have to be true.
text: The truth of these premises would entail the truth of the conclusion: if the premises were true the conclusion couldn’t be false.
text: This is a bad argument because the premises could both be true yet the conclusion false.
text: This is a good argument, despite the fact that both its premises are false, because the conclusion follows from the premises: if the premises were true the conclusion would have to be true.
text: We want our arguments to be good, such that their conclusion follows from their premises; but we also want them to be sound, meaning that their premises are true, and their conclusions follows from their premises.
text: We often don’t know, after all, whether our premises are true or false.
text: Deductive arguments when good are valid: if the premises are true the conclusions logically must be true.
text: If an argument is deductively valid, and its premises are true, then it is logically impossible for the conclusion to be false.
text: Its premise might be true yet its conclusion false.
text: It is a mistake for a theist to say: “Since the premise is true (and the argument is valid), this argument shows that the conclusion of the argument is true”, just as it is a mistake for a non-theist to say that the argument
text: In deduction, the validity of an argument is determined solely by its logical form, not its content, whereas the soundness requires both validity and that all the given premises are actually true.
text: (Note that in a distinct philosophical use of the term, an argument is sound when it is both valid and its premises are true.)
text: 3) it is impossible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion is false.
text: 13) the premises are all true but the conclusion is false
text: 14) it is possible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion is false
text: 4) false; all that is required is that if the premises were true, then the conclusion would have to be true.
text: 6) false; the premises of a valid argument can in fact all be false; the conclusion of a valid argument can be false; the only thing required is that if the premises were true, the conclusion could not be false.
text: 13) true; the fact that the premises are all true while the conclusion is false shows that it is indeed possible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion is false.
text: 13) true; the fact that the premises are all true while the conclusion is false shows that it is indeed possible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion is false.
text: 16) true; if we can do this, then it is possible for the premises all to be true while the conclusion is false.
text: The second part of the argument is the conclusion, which states the proposition that should be accepted if the premise or premises are true.
text: The second part of the argument is the conclusion, which states the proposition that should be accepted if the premise or premises are true.
text: In other words, if your argument is valid then there’s no way for the premises to all be true and the conclusion to be false.
text: This is a bad argument, despite the fact its premises are both true and its conclusion is true.
text: If a deductive argument is valid and its premises are all true, then it is also referred to as sound.
text: Some deductive arguments are perfect, and if their premises are in fact true, then it follows that their conclusions must also be true, no matter what else may happen to be the case.
text: All other deductive arguments are no good at alltheir conclusions may be false even if their premises are true, and no amount of additional information can help them in the least.
text: Any deductive argument that is not valid is invalid : it is possible for its conclusion to be false while its premises are true, so even if the premises are true, the conclusion may turn out to be either true or false.
text: The only thing that cannot happen is for a deductive argument to have true premises and a valid inference but a false conclusion.
text: To say that a deductive argument is valid means (2) it is impossible for its premises all to be true while the conclusion is false.
text: Criterion #1 : A good argument must have true premises
text: So far we think that a good argument must (1) have true premises, and (2) be valid or inductively strong.
text: One interesting but somewhat difficult issue about the definition of a good argument concerns the first requirement that a good argument must have true premises.
text: Surely you were justified in believing the premise, and so someone might argue that it is wrong to require that a good argument must have true premises.
text: A good argument must: have true premises, be valid or strong, and have premises that are more plausible than its conclusion.
text: A good argument is such that if its premises are true its conclusion must be true (or as we’ll see below, probably true).
text: If its premises are true then its conclusion will also be true.
text: A sound argument is an argument with two features: (i) it is valid, and (ii) its premises are all true.
text: When an inductively strong argument does have true premises, we call it cogent.
text: A formally valid argument that has true premises is said to be a sound argument.
text: If a valid argument has true premises, then the argument is said also to be sound.
text: What makes this a valid argument is not that it has true premises and a true conclusion, but the logical necessity of the conclusion, given the two premises.
text: It is impossible for the conclusion of a valid argument to be false while its premises are true.