If propositional singular terms are merely pleonastic transformations of sentences, argument validity is grounded in the underlying sentential equivalences, not in proposition-entity designation.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Argument validity(as used in logic): When the reasoning in an argument is logically sound, meaning if the starting points (premises) are true, the conclusion must be true.
Pleonastic transformations(as used in metaphysics and logic): A way of rephrasing something that sounds fancier or more complicated but actually means the same thing—like saying 'the property of being red' when you could just say 'red.'
Proposition-entity designation(as used in metaphysics and philosophy of language): The idea that when we talk about something (like 'the number 7'), we're actually pointing to a real thing that exists independently, rather than just describing a relationship between sentences.
Propositional singular terms(as used in logic and philosophy of language): Words or phrases that seem to point to specific things or ideas (like 'the number 7' or 'justice itself'), which some philosophers argue are just a roundabout way of saying something about sentences.

Based on where you are in your exploration