[ExI] A Simulation Argument

Kevin H kevin.l.holmes at gmail.com
Sun Jan 6 07:22:53 UTC 2008


On 1/5/08, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> No, the purpose of deductive argumentation is to deduce further facts from
> existing known facts.  The major premise must be true for the argument to
> be
> true.  If the major premise is assumed, it is called "begging the
> question"
> or "circular logic" where the assumption is made first, and then the
> argument is derived from the assumption.


He's trying to say the argument is meant hypothetically, as testing out the
consequences from the premises.  It actually does make sense, if you suspect
a given conclusion to be true, to find a deductive argument for it to see if
the necessary premises for it can be substantiated, and which premises are
needed.  Logic only cares about *logical* priority, it really doesn't care
if you come across the conclusion or the premises first; and it certainly
doesn't demand that premises can't be tested or tried out until you somehow
have absolutely certainty that they are true.

And I think it's time to distinguish between soundness and validity.
There's no logical meaning that I know of for an argument being "true".
Validity just ensures that *if* the premises are true, then the conclusion
is necessarily true.  Soundness is when the argument is valid, the premises
are all true, and the conclusion is therefore true.  While it is great when
an argument is sound, as that is usually the ultimate aim of the argument,
it is really only the arguments in mathematics where we can have confidence
in the soundness of arguments.  Everywhere else, there's usually some
measure of doubt.

Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080106/e55d566b/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list