Mixing
Can an argument be formally valid with sound premises and still be informally fallacious?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider the following two assumptions:
Validity Assumption: Assume an argument is valid. It follows all the formal logical rules of inference. The inference contains no formal logical fallacy.
Soundness Assumption: Assume the premises of the argument are sound, verified by a competent subject-matter expert.
Given the soundness assumption, the validity assumption would imply that the conclusion is logically true.
Is it possible for this argument to still be an example of an informal fallacy?
What makes me think this is possible is that establishing the soundness assumption, which I assumed to be true, cannot be done with absolute certainty. The subject-matter expert verifying the premises as true may have made an error of judgment. The validity assumption is more reliable as an assumption than the assumption of soundness since it can be checked with a computer without involving human judgment.
This would make the list of informal logical fallacies valuable. They would be ways to test sound and valid arguments by identifying places where the argument could go wrong.
What I am looking for are examples of such situations that would answer the question in the title as "yes" or an argument that such examples are not possible.
To repeat the question: Can an argument be formally valid with sound premises and still be informally fallacious?
logic fallacies
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider the following two assumptions:
Validity Assumption: Assume an argument is valid. It follows all the formal logical rules of inference. The inference contains no formal logical fallacy.
Soundness Assumption: Assume the premises of the argument are sound, verified by a competent subject-matter expert.
Given the soundness assumption, the validity assumption would imply that the conclusion is logically true.
Is it possible for this argument to still be an example of an informal fallacy?
What makes me think this is possible is that establishing the soundness assumption, which I assumed to be true, cannot be done with absolute certainty. The subject-matter expert verifying the premises as true may have made an error of judgment. The validity assumption is more reliable as an assumption than the assumption of soundness since it can be checked with a computer without involving human judgment.
This would make the list of informal logical fallacies valuable. They would be ways to test sound and valid arguments by identifying places where the argument could go wrong.
What I am looking for are examples of such situations that would answer the question in the title as "yes" or an argument that such examples are not possible.
To repeat the question: Can an argument be formally valid with sound premises and still be informally fallacious?
logic fallacies
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider the following two assumptions:
Validity Assumption: Assume an argument is valid. It follows all the formal logical rules of inference. The inference contains no formal logical fallacy.
Soundness Assumption: Assume the premises of the argument are sound, verified by a competent subject-matter expert.
Given the soundness assumption, the validity assumption would imply that the conclusion is logically true.
Is it possible for this argument to still be an example of an informal fallacy?
What makes me think this is possible is that establishing the soundness assumption, which I assumed to be true, cannot be done with absolute certainty. The subject-matter expert verifying the premises as true may have made an error of judgment. The validity assumption is more reliable as an assumption than the assumption of soundness since it can be checked with a computer without involving human judgment.
This would make the list of informal logical fallacies valuable. They would be ways to test sound and valid arguments by identifying places where the argument could go wrong.
What I am looking for are examples of such situations that would answer the question in the title as "yes" or an argument that such examples are not possible.
To repeat the question: Can an argument be formally valid with sound premises and still be informally fallacious?
logic fallacies
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
Consider the following two assumptions:
Validity Assumption: Assume an argument is valid. It follows all the formal logical rules of inference. The inference contains no formal logical fallacy.
Soundness Assumption: Assume the premises of the argument are sound, verified by a competent subject-matter expert.
Given the soundness assumption, the validity assumption would imply that the conclusion is logically true.
Is it possible for this argument to still be an example of an informal fallacy?
What makes me think this is possible is that establishing the soundness assumption, which I assumed to be true, cannot be done with absolute certainty. The subject-matter expert verifying the premises as true may have made an error of judgment. The validity assumption is more reliable as an assumption than the assumption of soundness since it can be checked with a computer without involving human judgment.
This would make the list of informal logical fallacies valuable. They would be ways to test sound and valid arguments by identifying places where the argument could go wrong.
What I am looking for are examples of such situations that would answer the question in the title as "yes" or an argument that such examples are not possible.
To repeat the question: Can an argument be formally valid with sound premises and still be informally fallacious?
logic fallacies
logic fallacies
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
asked 1 hour ago
Frank Hubeny
3,4302834
3,4302834
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
I say yes.
Consider two people who don't know the color of bananas, and are trying to figure it out through an argument. One of them provides the following argument:
Bananas are yellow
Therefore, bananas are yellow
It's clearly valid, and any subject-matter expert would agree with the premise. But, the second person will (rightly!) object that this argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning/begging the question
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
I say yes.
Consider two people who don't know the color of bananas, and are trying to figure it out through an argument. One of them provides the following argument:
Bananas are yellow
Therefore, bananas are yellow
It's clearly valid, and any subject-matter expert would agree with the premise. But, the second person will (rightly!) object that this argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning/begging the question
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
I say yes.
Consider two people who don't know the color of bananas, and are trying to figure it out through an argument. One of them provides the following argument:
Bananas are yellow
Therefore, bananas are yellow
It's clearly valid, and any subject-matter expert would agree with the premise. But, the second person will (rightly!) object that this argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning/begging the question
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
I say yes.
Consider two people who don't know the color of bananas, and are trying to figure it out through an argument. One of them provides the following argument:
Bananas are yellow
Therefore, bananas are yellow
It's clearly valid, and any subject-matter expert would agree with the premise. But, the second person will (rightly!) object that this argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning/begging the question
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
I say yes.
Consider two people who don't know the color of bananas, and are trying to figure it out through an argument. One of them provides the following argument:
Bananas are yellow
Therefore, bananas are yellow
It's clearly valid, and any subject-matter expert would agree with the premise. But, the second person will (rightly!) object that this argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning/begging the question
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
edited 24 mins ago
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
answered 29 mins ago
Bram28
2,045311
2,045311
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
add a comment |Â
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
"any subject=matter expert would agree with the premise" - debatably, of course. We know there are green bananas.
– rus9384
27 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
@rus9384 Ha ha, yes, at my local supermarket :)
– Bram28
24 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphilosophy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55553%2fcan-an-argument-be-formally-valid-with-sound-premises-and-still-be-informally-fa%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Doesn't soundness already include validity? And I'm not sure there actually are purely deductive arguments anywhere.
– rus9384
59 mins ago
Yes, easily. One example is begging the question against an opponent, i.e. using a premise the opponent is known to reject, another is Aristotle's ignoratio elenchi, deriving an irrelevant conclusion, say, for red herring purposes. For general critique of using formal standards of validity in informal contexts, including real life debates, see Toulmin's argumentation theory.
– Conifold
18 mins ago