LPL_2.2_lecture

LPL_2.2_lecture - Informal proofs with identity All of the...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Informal proofs with identity All of the arguments we will deal with will either be valid or invalid. Accordingly, we need to develop methods of demonstrating logical consequence , or the fact that a given conclusion either does or does not follow from a given set of premises. Remember, if the conclusion of an argument does follow from its premises, then the argument is valid; if the conclusion does not follow from the premises, then the argument is invalid. While demonstrating that an argument is invalid is as easy as finding a circumstance in which the premises are true and the conclusion false, how might we demonstrate that an argument is valid? Proofs In formal logic, a proof is a step-by-step demonstration that a given conclusion does indeed follow from a given set of premises. Proofs allow us to use intermediate steps that establish connections among the premises that will be helpful in demonstrating that the conclusion is a logical consequence of those premises. 1. Socrates is a man.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 06/06/2011 for the course PHIL 110 taught by Professor ? during the Fall '06 term at South Carolina.

Page1 / 3

LPL_2.2_lecture - Informal proofs with identity All of the...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online