|
|
Post by georgelucas1337 on Oct 28, 2015 19:54:32 GMT -5
If I am a human, then I am alive
I am alive
Therefore, I am a human
Q: Is this argument valid or invalid?
Whoever gets it right, I'll send them a healing ward irl |
|
|
|
Post by redhaze420 on Nov 8, 2015 4:28:50 GMT -5
I could talk for several paragraphs, and almost did, but instead I decided to shortened it down to this. In theory, yes this is a valid statement. In court or appeal to the masses however, without publicly performing this statement, it would be rendered invalid, as the same could be said in any other direction. You lack empirical evidence. Defaultname327@aol.com , lets talk about you giving me that healing ward...
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 11, 2015 13:55:02 GMT -5
the statement is not valid and it has nothing to do with "empirical evidence". this isnt a court room and we do not need to observe his actions to disprove his statement (because) we are not going to assume that there is any missing evidence... based on his question we have all the information we need.
so... simply stating that "B is true because of A" does not mean that A is true because of B.
if we take his first statement of "a human is alive" as being true, it does not suggest that ONLY humans can be alive.
obviously we know he IS a living human, but the argument is invalid because there is nothing to support that ONLY humans can be alive.
|
|
