submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Not really; an argument is valid if the conclusion is true only when the premises are valid. I believe the argument can be best constructed as follows:

If you think femboys are attractive, you're gay
If you don't think femboys are attractive, you're gay

Therefore, you're gay

Not only is this a valid argument because assuming the premises, the conclusion must be true, it's formally valid because it follows the form

A -> B
~A -> B

Therefore B

And this argument is valid for all choices of A and B. It doesn't really have anything to do with the conclusion being true.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

In other words, the argument is valid but not sound.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah exactly

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

My statement refers to the construction of ==> from truth tables as a logical gate:

Both (False ==> True) and (False ==> False) are True; everything can follow from false premises
(True ==> True) is True; A true premise always implies a true conclusion
(True ==> False) is False; you cannot infer a falsehood from a truth.

By counting the entries of the table, we see that if Y is True, then (X ==> Y) must always be True no matter what we substitute for X. The joke is that this means we assume foreknowledge of the reader being gay

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Ah I see what you mean; you're right. Though an argument being valid and an implication being true are different things, so I think we misunderstood each other's meaning.

this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023

90 points (88.8% liked)

shitposting

1624 readers

4 users here now

For the dankest of all memes

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]