Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Formal validity, properly construed, is defined by form a... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→An inference is formally valid in the restricted sense if the opposite of its consequent is formally incompatible with its antecedent, but not every application of that form is valid

    Formal validity, properly construed, is defined by form alone: if a form is valid, every substitution instance must preserve truth.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Formal validity must depend only on logical structure, not content, or else validity becomes subjective and varies by domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Truth-preservation under all substitutions is the only criterion that cleanly separates valid from invalid argument forms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If form alone doesn't determine validity, we cannot teach or systematize logic as a formal discipline.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some formally valid arguments in first-order logic fail truth-preservation when quantifiers range over empty domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Substitution instances require interpretation of non-logical terms; validity thus depends partly on semantic content, not form alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Classical logic and intuitionistic logic have identical forms but different validity standards, suggesting form underdetermines validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    An inference is formally valid in the restricted sense if the opposite of its co...Classical logic and intuitionistic logic have identical forms but different vali...Formal validity must depend only on logical structure, not content, or else vali...If form alone doesn't determine validity, we cannot teach or systematize logic a...
    +3 moreShow less
    Some formally valid arguments in first-order logic fail truth-preservation when ...Substitution instances require interpretation of non-logical terms; validity thu...Truth-preservation under all substitutions is the only criterion that cleanly se...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit