View Poll Results: Is the argument valid?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, the argument is valid.

    3 33.33%
  • No, the argument is not valid.

    3 33.33%
  • I don't know

    0 0%
  • The argument doesn't make sense

    3 33.33%
Page 1 of 24 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 235

Thread: And the next U.K. Prime Minister will be?

  1. Top | #1
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,286
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,948
    Rep Power
    46

    And the next U.K. Prime Minister will be?

    Here is a "U.K. current affairs" argument.

    P1 - Jeremy Corbyn is not Boris Johnson;
    P2 - Boris Johnson is not Jeremy Hunt;
    P3 - Jeremy Hunt is not Jeremy Corbyn;
    P4 - The next U.K. Prime Minister will be either Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt;
    P5 - The next U.K. Prime Minister will be Jeremy Corbyn;
    C - Therefore, the next U.K. Prime Minister will be Boris Johnson.
    Thank you to say whether you consider this argument valid or not.

    Thank you to abstain from commenting before you voted.
    EB

  2. Top | #2
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Tricky tricky but it’s valid. Unsound as all get-out, but it’s technically valid in accordance to how logicians are taught deductive logic. That it’s unsound is what’s more important, but as far as validity goes (which ignores truth) and focuses only on logical form, it is valid.

  3. Top | #3
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,286
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,948
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Tricky tricky but it’s valid. Unsound as all get-out, but it’s technically valid in accordance to how logicians are taught deductive logic. That it’s unsound is what’s more important, but as far as validity goes (which ignores truth) and focuses only on logical form, it is valid.
    The question isn't whether the argument is "technically valid in accordance to how logicians are taught deductive logic" but whether YOU consider it valid or not.

    Still, you do as you please.
    EB

  4. Top | #4
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,286
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,948
    Rep Power
    46
    Tammuz, thank you to try and explain how exactly the argument doesn't make sense. The English is straightforward and I'm sure you understand what it says. So, what exactly doesn't make sense here?
    EB

  5. Top | #5
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Tricky tricky but it’s valid. Unsound as all get-out, but it’s technically valid in accordance to how logicians are taught deductive logic. That it’s unsound is what’s more important, but as far as validity goes (which ignores truth) and focuses only on logical form, it is valid.
    The question isn't whether the argument is "technically valid in accordance to how logicians are taught deductive logic" but whether YOU consider it valid or not.

    Still, you do as you please.
    EB
    Well, just to be clear, it’s an objective matter, so it’s either valid or not independent of what I consider it to be, as either my consideration will accord with its validity or not.

    As to your displeasure with my specificity (as used in higher education), that was so I left room to talk past the leaned (trained ones) when I later agreed with you who does not use “valid” as ordinarily used in deductive logic.

    Mrs Jones gives her hubby a check to deposit at the bank. He grabs his fishing pole.

    Where he is not ... is at the bank (financial institution) B1
    Where he is at ... is at the bank (side of river) B2

    She calls him up and asks “are you at the bank?” (B1)
    If he says yes, he’s uttered a falsehood (because that’s equivalent to asserting he’s at the bank she is talking about.
    If he says that he’s at the bank (B2), that is just deceptive (because now he’s intentionally using the word in a different way.)

    When you ask about whether we consider the argument is valid, it’s like you are leaving it up to the reader to decide which usage they prefer. I picked one and answered. If you’d prefer I use “valid” as you’ve been using it in recent threads, then like the person who says an act is not criminal (in the legal sense despite it being legal in the moral sense), then of course it’s not valid.

  6. Top | #6
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    15,116
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    57,059
    Rep Power
    74
    I choose that the argument does not make sense. The Tories will choose the next PM and they will not choose Corbyn. And I believe there is yet someone else in the running for PM as a Tory. So the argument reduces to BJ or JH or ____will be the next prime minister. There is no logical reason that any of the 3 outcomes will necessarily occur. From I read, the odds are that BJ will be chosen, even though by most standards Mr. Johnson is likely to be a complete and utter disaster compared to the other choices.

  7. Top | #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    88
    Rep Power
    8
    It's Johnson or Hunt who are up for next Tory leader, thus PM. Both are awful choices, but Johnson is worse by a country mile.

    However, they're being chosen by the grossly unrepresentative* Tory Membership, about 150,000 people and they love Johnson.

    *by unrepresentative, this is a recent poll:

    Quote Originally Posted by article
    Sixty-three per cent of members said they would be prepared to accept Scottish independence to get Brexit, while 59 per cent said the same about a united Ireland. Just 29 and 28 per cent were opposed, respectively.


    “Significant damage” to the UK economy was also no deterrent, with 61 per cent in favour and 29 per cent opposed. Some 54 per cent said the Tory party’s complete destruction would still be a price worth paying for Brexit.
    source

  8. Top | #8
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,286
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,948
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    I choose that the argument does not make sense. The Tories will choose the next PM and they will not choose Corbyn. And I believe there is yet someone else in the running for PM as a Tory. So the argument reduces to BJ or JH or ____will be the next prime minister. There is no logical reason that any of the 3 outcomes will necessarily occur. From I read, the odds are that BJ will be chosen, even though by most standards Mr. Johnson is likely to be a complete and utter disaster compared to the other choices.
    Yeah, i know all this and all too well, I listen to BBC Radio Four every day! They've been talking about the Brexit and only the Brexit for the last two years at least.

    Why did you vote the argument doesn't make sense? You seem to understand the English of it well enough. What is the problem exactly?
    EB

  9. Top | #9
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,286
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,948
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by EvoUK View Post
    It's Johnson or Hunt who are up for next Tory leader, thus PM. Both are awful choices, but Johnson is worse by a country mile.

    However, they're being chosen by the grossly unrepresentative* Tory Membership, about 150,000 people and they love Johnson.

    *by unrepresentative, this is a recent poll:

    Quote Originally Posted by article
    Sixty-three per cent of members said they would be prepared to accept Scottish independence to get Brexit, while 59 per cent said the same about a united Ireland. Just 29 and 28 per cent were opposed, respectively.


    “Significant damage” to the UK economy was also no deterrent, with 61 per cent in favour and 29 per cent opposed. Some 54 per cent said the Tory party’s complete destruction would still be a price worth paying for Brexit.
    source
    Please vote first, comment afterwards.
    EB

  10. Top | #10
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    15,116
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    57,059
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    I choose that the argument does not make sense. The Tories will choose the next PM and they will not choose Corbyn. And I believe there is yet someone else in the running for PM as a Tory. So the argument reduces to BJ or JH or ____will be the next prime minister. There is no logical reason that any of the 3 outcomes will necessarily occur. From I read, the odds are that BJ will be chosen, even though by most standards Mr. Johnson is likely to be a complete and utter disaster compared to the other choices.
    Yeah, i know all this and all too well, I listen to BBC Radio Four every day! They've been talking about the Brexit and only the Brexit for the last two years at least.

    Why did you vote the argument doesn't make sense? You seem to understand the English of it well enough. What is the problem exactly?
    EB
    I find
    1) the premises do not encompass all of the alternatives, and
    2) the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises.

    Now, from what I have read, I think Mr. Johnson is the expected selection because the Tories appear dead set on destroying their party and England.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •