Practice question · Multiple choice
An argument has all false premises and a false conclusion, yet it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. Is it valid, and why?
Hints
- Recall the exact definition of validity.
- Validity says the premises CANNOT be true with the conclusion false, it never requires them to be true.
Show the answer
C. Valid, because validity concerns the form of the inference, not the truth of the parts
Why
Validity is entirely about form. "All fish are mammals; all mammals are green; so all fish are green" is made of falsehoods and is impeccably valid. False premises make it unsound, which is a different defect.
Practise Arguments, Validity and Soundness
The app has 4 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Philosophy I is free to start.
More questions on Arguments, Validity and Soundness
- Of the four classic conditional argument forms — modus ponens, modus tollens, affirming the consequent,…
- Logic isolates whether a conclusion follows from its premises from whether those premises are true. What does…
- Which statements about validity are correct?
- Sort each argument by whether it is deductive or inductive.
- Arrange these steps in the order you would use to evaluate an argument.
- Match each term to its precise meaning.