Yeung Chun Yin 1

▪ Can the premises support the conclusion?

▪ If it is valid, are the premises true?

2
▪ Can the premises support the conclusion?
▪ Validity

▪ If it is valid, are the premises true?

▪ Soundness

3
▪ How do the premises support the conclusion in a good
deductive argument?
▪ The premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

▪ Evaluation
▪ Do the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion?

4
▪ A valid argument
▪ The premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

→ If all the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
→ It is impossible that all the premises are true but the conclusion is
false.
▪ The best formulation: It is logically impossible that all the
premises are true but the conclusion is false.

5
▪ Technological Possibility
▪ Do not exceed our current technological constraints.
▪ Physical Possibility
▪ Do not exceed our physical constraints.
▪ Logical Possibility
▪ Do not exceed our logical constraints.
▪ A proposition is logically impossible if there is logical contradiction
▪ E.g. 我有去吃飯但我沒有去吃飯
▪ This sentence is logically impossible to be true
▪ All other things / sentence that would not produce logical
contradiction is logically possible

6
 Circle-square

Move faster than light.

Logical Possibility

Physical Possibility Westworld’s robots

Technological Possibility 32GB USB flash drive

7
P1: All dogs are mammals.
P2: All mammals are animals.

C: All dogs are animals.

Valid Argument!

8
P1: All dogs are mammals.
P2: Some mammals are animals.

C: All dogs are animals.

Invalid Argument!

9
P1. 小明想讀畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。
P2. 哲學是畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。

C. 小明想讀哲學。

P1. 小明跑得快過火車。
P2. 火車開得比火箭更快。

C. 小明跑得快過火箭。
10
▪ The validity of an argument is independent of whether the
premises are actually true.
▪ It depends only on whether the conclusion must be true, if all
the premises are true.

P1. 小明想讀畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。
P2. 哲學是畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。 → False
C. 小明想讀哲學。
11
P1. All cats are dogs.
P2. All dogs have 4 wings.

C. All cats have 4 wings.

12
▪ The validity of an argument is independent of whether the
conclusion is true.
▪ 就算前提結論全是假的，論證也可能是valid。

P1. All cats are dogs. → False

P2. All dogs have 4 wings.→ False
C. All cats have 4 wings. → False

13
P1. 有些勇敢的人是愚蠢的。
P2. 有些愚蠢的人是好色的。

C. 有些勇敢的人是好色的。

14
▪ 這論證是invalid的，因為雖然愚蠢的人中有些是勇敢的，有些是
好色的，但剛好他們並不重疊。在這情況下，前提為真但結論可
為假，而這顯示了這論證並不valid。

15
▪ The validity of an argument is independent of whether the
conclusion is true.
▪ 就算前提結論全是真的，論證也可能是invalid。

P1.有些勇敢的人是愚蠢的。 → True
P2.有些愚蠢的人是好色的。 → True
C.有些勇敢的人是好色的。 → True
16
▪ Validity: a criterion to evaluate a deductive argument.
▪ The validity of an argument is determined solely by the
following criterion: whether it is possible to have all true
premises and false conclusion.
▪ Yes → Invalid
▪ No → Valid

17
▪ A valid argument is good because it is truth-preseving.
▪ If you input only true premises, it will give you a true
conclusion.

18
▪ A valid argument is truth preserving.
▪ If you input only true premises, it will give you a true conclusion.

▪ So, it is also important if the premises are true.

▪ A sound argument
▪ Definition: A valid argument with all true premises.

**Attention: a sound argument must be valid, but a valid argument may be unsound.**

19
P1. 小明想讀畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。
P2. 哲學是畢業後在香港最賺錢的學科。

C. 小明想讀哲學。

P1. 小明跑得快過火車。
P2. 火車開得比火箭更快。

C. 小明跑得快過火箭。
20
P1: All dogs are mammals.
P2: All mammals are animals.

C: All dogs are animals.

21
▪ In an inductive argument, the premise(s) is claimed to
support the claim that the conclusion is probably true.

▪ While in a deductive argument, the premises(s) is claimed to

guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

22
▪ When evaluating a deductive argument, we evaluate the
argument from two aspects:

1. Whether the premise(s) provide enough support for the

conclusion?
▪ Validity

2. Whether the premise(s) is true (if the argument is valid)?

▪ Soundness

23
▪ Validity and Soundness are inappropriate criteria of
evaluation for an inductive argument.

▪ Because an inductive argument never claims the premise(s)

guarantees the truth of the conclusion.

▪ An invalid argument can thus be a good argument in the

inductive sense.

24
▪ We have two parallel criteria for evaluating an inductive
argument.

▪ Strength
➢Whether the premise(s) provide enough support to the
conclusion

▪ Cogency
➢Whether the premises(s) are true (given that the argument is
strong)
25
▪ In an inductive argument, the premise(s) is claimed to
support the claim that the conclusion is probably true.

▪ So an argument is a strong argument if…

▪ If the premises are all true, then it is improbable for the conclusion
to be false.

▪ It is parallel to the definition of a valid argument:

▪ If the premises are all true, then it is impossible for the conclusion
to be false
26
▪ Here is an example of strong argument:

P1. 太陽之前每天都從東邊升起。

C. 太陽明天會從東邊升起。

▪ If the premise is true, then it is improbable that the conclusion

is false.

27
▪ Here is an example of weak argument:

P1. 跟我一起過的男人都是壞人。

C. 所有男人都是壞人。

▪ Why is it weak?
▪ How many men have you met?
▪ Even if the premise is true, it is not improbable that the
conclusion is true! 28
▪ Just like the case of valid argument, a strong argument can
have false premise(s).
▪ An argument is strong if its conclusion is improbable to be
false, if the premises are all true.
▪ So a strong argument is a good inductive argument only if its
premises are also true.

29
▪ A cogent argument is a strong argument with all true
premises.

▪ It is parallel to a sound argument when we evaluate a

deductive argument.

30
▪ 2 major differences:

Validity Strength
▪ Black and white ▪ A matter of degree
▪ An argument is either valid ▪ An argument can have
or invalid. different degree of strength.

31
▪ Validity
▪ You cannot turn an arugment invalid by adding one more premise
to the argument.

P1. 所有人都有八手八腳。
P2. 所有有八手八腳的都是八爪魚。

C. 所有人都是八爪魚。

▪ What premise can you add to turn this valid argument into
invalid? No.

32
▪ Because for a valid argument, it is logically impossible that all the
premises are true and the conclusion is false, it means that you have
considered all logically possible worlds and there are no such case
▪ So if you add one more premise (for example ‘天空是藍色的’), now we
have to consider whether there exists a possible world in which all three
premises are true and the conclusion is false
▪ But the possible worlds in which the two original premises and this new
premise are true, have already been considered when there are only two
premises
▪ Because those possible worlds where all three premises must also be
possible worlds in where all two original premises are true

33
▪ Strength
▪ You may turn a strong argument into a weak one, simply by adding
one more premise.
P1. 接受調查的5000個中大學生都擁有手提電話。
P2. 小強是中大學生。

C. 小強有手提電話。
▪ This is a strong argument.
▪ But it will become a weak argument if we add the additional
premise “小強有手提電話敏感”.
34