I wrote this argument, and while i'm sure it is valid, it has been awhile since I've done basic logic.Thanks!

enter image description here

  • The most philosophical part of your question is your prior assumption 1. (Unless you interpret the words of assumption 1 in a way that is self-evident, in which case that philosophicalness moves to assumption 2. Unless you're using words differently in both of those assumptions, in which case you're committing the fallacy of equivocation.)
    – wizzwizz4
    Jul 2, 2022 at 22:29
  • It is better practice to simplify your premises. You are trying to cram multiple premises into one. Also, you need to explain how you are using the word "exist". Your premise 1 is clearly false by the usual meaning of the word. Also, your premise 2 is controversial. It's not enough for an argument to be valid; it also has to have premises that the person you are trying to persuade accepts. Jul 3, 2022 at 9:23
  • @DavidGudeman , yeah I should've wrote that I'm not interested in the soundness of the argument, just the validity. What I meant by exist is that it has conscious awareness or feels like a self; hence, why I wrote "essentially" exists. Nonetheless, you're right that it is still ambiguous. As for the cramming, I don't see why it is necessary to seperate the premises in this case.
    – Anon1313
    Jul 3, 2022 at 18:03
  • I’m voting to close this question because this is not a homework forum Jul 4, 2022 at 4:50
  • @SwamiVishwananda it's not homework. There are good discussions being had here.
    – Anon1313
    Jul 4, 2022 at 14:43

1 Answer 1


Yes, it is certainly valid, however as you stated in the above comment it is in fact not sound.

You can convince yourself of this by separating your premises P1: and P2: from your conclusion P3: then using the technique of hypothetical syllogism, by assuming F which in turn makes the hypothesis of the conditional statement in P1: true, which in turn makes the conclusion in P1: true and therefore allows you to conclude P3:


  • Why do you think the premises aren't sound?
    – Anon1313
    Jul 4, 2022 at 4:16
  • Firstly my symbolic logic professor is yelling inside my head so I must say premises aren't sound, arguments are sound. Arguments are sound when they are valid and all their premises are true. It is not that I have empirical or scientific evidence that proves any of the premises are false. However, I must say that in showing an argument is sound the burden of proof is on the arguer, you, unless of course the premises are all tautologies. So the question now becomes: can you show me the argument is sound? Jul 4, 2022 at 5:45

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .