What makes an argument valid?

[@timh.boston649]

Dr. Corvino I love the work you do! Thank you for taking up this issue, the concise clarity and irrefutable logic that you apply to this issue is such a relief and so good to hear. Please keep doing what you’re doing.

[@whatisahandleeee]

Holy crap. 8 hours of studying and trying to figure out validity and all it took was a 4 minute video to finally understand.

[@bpls169]

I really like every single video of this guy, seriously. P.S first comment

[@Roy-mk9zl]

10th like.

[@NathanNobis101]

A correction of sorts: he gives two definitions of "valid" or "validity" here and this is the correct one: "if the premises WERE true, then the conclusion would be true." This helps understand why his example argument -- (1) If my office is in Detroit, then my office is in France; (2) my office is in Detroit; (3) therefore, my office is in France" -- is valid: if those premises WERE true, then the conclusion would have to be true: so, imagine that premise 1 were true and Detroit was indeed in France. The mistaken definition "if the premises ARE true, then the conclusion is true" doesn't help with this type of example, and make it hard to see why this argument's premises lead to the conclusion, since the premises are not true. So, again, this is the correct definition, which he gives but not all the time here: "if the premises WERE true, then the conclusion would be true."

[@5iTube]

I did wonder where you went. Welcome back :)

[@hasekfan2450]

We should send this video to every religious person

[@HungryMusicologist]

Great videos. But I think you should space them out more. Upload for example once or twice every week. Keeps your audience more engaged than suddenly uploading ten videos and then being silent for a while. Plus the KZbin algorithm rewards it.

[@brandonellis8111]

The fact that this video only has 17k views and 12 comments says a lot about KZbin 😭

[@harryjamesbhattarai592]

You're better than my prof

[@Mo_confidential]

You dressed french for 2 seconds of video. Sub

[@brandonellis8111]

Fax

[@MusicalRaichu]

problem is that not everybody minds their ps and qs.

[@nealithh]

If P then Q Q therefore P Nope. If it is raining then the grass is wet. The grass is wet therefore the sprinklers have turned on. There is a difference between If Then statements and If And Only If statements. The converse of an If Then statement is not necessarily true. Converse en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Converse_(logic) If and only if en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_and_only_if

[@timberrr1126]

Logic cannot prove something is true. Logic removes all that is untrue. This leaves that which is true without proving it is true. This allows Truth to be replaced by a new Truth. The Earth was flat. Now it is a sphere. Therefore, Truth cannot be said to be absolute. Only Axioms are accepted as Absolute Truth. A sculptor of clay elephants was asked what mysterious technique he uses to make such truly handsome clay elephants. The artist’s elephants look so true! The sculptor replied, “I remove all that isn’t elephant.”