LPL 2.22 - LP L 2.22 R I K SENGUPTA The argument is not...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: LP L 2.22 R I K SENGUPTA The argument is not valid. So obviously it is not sound. The following is an informal counterexample to it. Let's consider this situation: There are 10,000 people in the world who know how to program a computer. Since anyone who knows how to program a computer is a computer scientist, these 10,000 people are all computer scientists. There are 5,000 other computer scientists, who do not know how to program a computer. Since each person in the world can either program a computer or not program one, so each computer scientist can also either program a computer or not program one, as computer scientists are people too; thus we have accounted for all computer scientists in the world, who number 15,000 (10,000 programmers + 5,000 non-programmers). These computer scientists are all r ich, but it is not necessary that all r ich people are computer scientists. Let Bill Gates be a r ich person who is not one of these 15,000; so he is for instance a r ich chartered accountant (we assume that if a person X is a chartered accountant, he is not a computer scientist, and if a person is a computer scientist, he is not a chartered accountant). So in this case, all the premises are t rue, as the arguments are based upon these very same premises. But the conclusion is clearly not t rue, as Bill Gates is not a computer scientist, so he obviously does not know how to program a computer (if he did know, then our assumption would lead to the logical conclusion that Bill Gates is a computer scientist, something which is not t rue, as we showed just now). This is a valid, informal counterexample to the argument. ...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online