Scribd
Upload
3 views

Unit1.3-1

The document discusses the structure of arguments, including premises and conclusions, and defines validity in terms of truth in premises leading to a true conclusion. It provides examples of valid and invalid argument forms, including syllogisms and common logical errors such as converse and inverse errors. Additionally, it introduces the concept of soundness, which requires an argument to be both valid and have all true premises.

Uploaded by

stephennyanbwi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
3 views

Unit1.3-1

The document discusses the structure of arguments, including premises and conclusions, and defines validity in terms of truth in premises leading to a true conclusion. It provides examples of valid and invalid argument forms, including syllogisms and common logical errors such as converse and inverse errors. Additionally, it introduces the concept of soundness, which requires an argument to be both valid and have all true premises.

Uploaded by

stephennyanbwi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

WTW 115

Unit 1.3: Valid and invalid arguments, part 1

University of Pretoria
Argument forms

An argument form consists of


▶ A list of statement forms, which are called the assumptions,
hypotheses, or premises; and then
▶ One additional statement form, which is called the conclusion.
Example of an argument form:

p∨q
∼q
∴p

Here, the first hypothesis is p ∨ q, the second hypothesis is ∼q,


and the conclusion is p.
A syllogism is an argument form in which there are exactly two
hypotheses.
Arguments

An argument consists of
▶ A list of statements, which are called the assumptions,
hypotheses, or premises; and then
▶ One additional statement, which is called the conclusion.
Example of an argument:

South Africa is in Africa or France is in Africa.


France is not in Africa.
∴ South Africa is in Africa.
Validity

An argument form is valid if the following holds:


If all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true.
An argument form is invalid if it is not valid.

An argument is valid (respectively, invalid) if the associated


argument form is valid (respectively, invalid).
Example 1

Check whether the following argument form is valid or invalid.

p∨q
∼q
∴p

p q p∨q ∼q p
(premise) (premise) (conclusion)
T T T F T
T F T T T Critical row
F T T F F
F F F T F
Wherever every premise is true, the conclusion is true. Therefore,
the argument form is valid.
Critical rows

In a truth table for an argument form, a critical row is a row in


which every premise is true.

To check if an argument form is valid, look at the critical rows.

If the conclusion is true in every critical row, then the argument


form is valid. Otherwise, the argument form is invalid.
Example 2

Check whether the following argument form is valid or invalid.

p→q
q
∴p

p q p→q q p
(premise) (premise) (conclusion)
T T T T T Critical row
T F F F T
F T T T F Critical row
F F T F F
If p is false and q is true, then every premise is true but the
conclusion is false. Therefore, the argument form is invalid.
Converse and inverse errors

The argument form


p→q
q
∴p
is a version of the converse error. It is invalid.

The argument form


p→q
∼p
∴ ∼q
is a version of the inverse error. It is invalid.
Example 3

Check whether the following argument form is valid or invalid.

p ∨ (q ∨ r )
∼p → q ∧ r
∼r
∴q

(Note: Please do not write “p ∨ q ∨ r ” when doing proofs with the


logical equivalence laws. We should see where the associative law
is used to change between p ∨ (q ∨ r ) and (p ∨ q) ∨ r .)
Example 3 continued

(conclusion)
∼p → q ∧ r
p ∨ (q ∨ r )
(premise)

(premise)

(premise)
q∨r

q∧r

∼r
∼p
p q r

q
T T T T T T F T F T
T T F T T F F T T T Critical row
T F T T T F F T F F
T F F F T F F T T F Critical row
F T T T T T T T F T
F T F T T F T F T T
F F T T T F T F F F
F F F F F F T F T F

If p is true but q and r are both false, then all premises are true
but the conclusion is false. Therefore, the argument form is invalid.
More examples
The argument form
p∨q
q → ∼p
∴ p ∨ ∼p
is valid: if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true.
Indeed, the conclusion is always true (it is a tautology), whatever
the premises’ truth values are.

The argument form


p
∼p
q → ∼q ∨ p
∴r
is valid: if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true.
That conditional statement is vacuously true, because the first two
premises in the argument form are never both true (if one is true,
then the other is false).
Soundness

An argument is sound if both of the following hold:


▶ The argument is valid, and
▶ All of the premises are true.

“Soundness” is not defined for argument forms; it is defined for


arguments.

You might also like