Are these valid or invalid, and are they sound, unsound, or plausible?

[1137]

I posted this elsewhere and thought I'd see how people understand these philosophical concepts. There are three arguments which are either valid or invalid, and which are either sound, unsound, or plausible/possibly sound.


1. All men are immortal.

2. Socrates was a man.

3. Therefore Socrates was immortal.

What about this one?

1. If the universe were slightly different life as we know it couldn't exist.

2. Life exists.

3. So the universe exists in a very specific form.

4. Such a specific form requires intelligent thought.

5. Therefore there is intelligent thought behind the universe.

And one more:

1. Humans are bipedal.

2. My dog is quadrupedal.

3. Therefore my dog is not a human.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I believe 1, 4 and 3 to be unsound, in that order, with the proceeding lines drawn from those numbers also unsound because of it.

 

[shunyadragon]

I posted this elsewhere and thought I'd see how people understand these philosophical concepts. There are three arguments which are either valid or invalid, and which are either sound, unsound, or plausible/possibly sound.


1. All men are immortal.

2. Socrates was a man.

3. Therefore Socrates was immortal.

OK if you accept premise 1. I do not accept the premise 1.

What about this one?

1. If the universe were slightly different life as we know it couldn't exist.

2. Life exists.

3. So the universe exists in a very specific form.

4. Such a specific form requires intelligent thought.

5. Therefore there is intelligent thought behind the universe.

Terrible on all counts.

And one more:

1. Humans are bipedal.

2. My dog is quadrupedal.

3. Therefore my dog is not a human.

Ok I guess

 

[1137]

OK if you accept premise 1. I do not accept the premise 1.



Terrible on all counts.



Ok I guess

I'm asking if they're valid and sound, not what you think about them.

 

[1137]

I believe 1, 4 and 3 to be unsound, in that order, with the proceeding lines drawn from those numbers also unsound because of it.

I'm not completely sure what you mean.

 

[sayak83]

I posted this elsewhere and thought I'd see how people understand these philosophical concepts. There are three arguments which are either valid or invalid, and which are either sound, unsound, or plausible/possibly sound.


1. All men are immortal.

2. Socrates was a man.

3. Therefore Socrates was immortal.

What about this one?

1. If the universe were slightly different life as we know it couldn't exist.

2. Life exists.

3. So the universe exists in a very specific form.

4. Such a specific form requires intelligent thought.

5. Therefore there is intelligent thought behind the universe.

And one more:

1. Humans are bipedal.

2. My dog is quadrupedal.

3. Therefore my dog is not a human.

A) Valid but unsound. (P1 false)
B) Invalid (P4 cannot be deduced from P3)
C) Valid but unsound (P1 false as human babies are quadrupedal)

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm not completely sure what you mean.

Apologies, I just got off a plane and am bringing a cold with me. @sayak83 said it more coherently.

 

[David T]

I posted this elsewhere and thought I'd see how people understand these philosophical concepts. There are three arguments which are either valid or invalid, and which are either sound, unsound, or plausible/possibly sound.


1. All men are immortal.

2. Socrates was a man.

3. Therefore Socrates was immortal.

What about this one?

1. If the universe were slightly different life as we know it couldn't exist.

2. Life exists.

3. So the universe exists in a very specific form.

4. Such a specific form requires intelligent thought.

5. Therefore there is intelligent thought behind the universe.

And one more:

1. Humans are bipedal.

2. My dog is quadrupedal.

3. Therefore my dog is not a human.

1. Philosophy posts are dumb
2. People who read them are clueless morons.
3. Therefore I am a clueless Moron reading dumb stuff.


Btw you are actually talking about what rolls through peoples brains trying to figure out how to justify some idea. It's not even logic it's so wrong.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I'm asking if they're valid and sound, not what you think about them.

Asked and answered elsewhere: Is it that incomprehensible to some that we theists may come to theism by way of evidence & reason?