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
    The substitutional criterion for validity is not the only... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The substitutional criterion for validity is not the only criterion by which arguments/consequences can be valid.

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Buridan accepts the form/matter distinction based on syncategorematic versus categorematic terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Buridan does not hold the thesis that only arguments satisfying the substitutional criterion are valid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ockham's razor demands that validity criteria not be multiplied beyond necessity if one criterion suffices to account for all valid inferences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The substitutional criterion, properly formalized with unrestricted substitution over all terms, captures every inference preserved across all interpretations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If substitutional validity under unrestricted term-substitution extensionally coincides with all valid inferences, positing additional criteria adds no explanatory power.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Buridan's own examples of non-substitutionally-valid consequences, such as 'A man runs, therefore an animal runs', are reducible to enthymemes with suppressed logical or metaphysical premises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If every apparent counterexample to substitutional sufficiency resolves into an enthymeme, the additional criterion tracks background assumptions rather than a genuinely distinct validity relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Medieval logicians including Albert of Saxony treated material consequences as pragmatically useful but not as exhibiting a formally distinct mode of 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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Buridan accepts the form/matter distinction based on syncategorematic versus cat...Buridan does not hold the thesis that only arguments satisfying the substitution...Buridan's own examples of non-substitutionally-valid consequences, such as 'A ma...If every apparent counterexample to substitutional sufficiency resolves into an ...
    +4 moreShow less
    If substitutional validity under unrestricted term-substitution extensionally co...Medieval logicians including Albert of Saxony treated material consequences as p...Ockham's razor demands that validity criteria not be multiplied beyond necessity...The substitutional criterion, properly formalized with unrestricted substitution...

    Similar

    Buridan does not hold the thesis that only arguments satisfying the su...88%The (ST) criterion requires validity in all substitutional instances, ...86%The substitutional criterion (ST) requires validity across all substit...86%The substitutional conception of validity (ST) defines only a special ...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: consequence-medieval
    View source passageHide passage
    The view that the form of a consequence/argument pertains to its syncategorematic terms while its matter pertains to its categorematic terms is presupposed in both earlier and subsequent texts, but here with Buridan it receives a rare explicit formulation. A modern version of this idea still survives, in the form of the doctrine of the logical form of arguments and the modern preoccupation with logical constants (Read 1994; Dutilh Novaes 2012a; entry on logical constants of this encyclopedia). H
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit