Betrayed by our Intuition

In the previous post, I presented an argument with two premises and asked if the conclusion in the third statement was logically valid. I repeat the argument here:

        1. Roses are flowers.
        2. Some flowers fade rapidly.
        3. Therefore, some roses fade rapidly.

Is that a valid logical argument?

Certainly we know from experience that some roses do fade rapidly. But that empirical fact does not matter here. We are concerned with the validity of the conclusion given the two premises.

As a matter of pure logic, the conclusion in (3) does not follow. Therefore the argument is invalid.


Author: Atanu Dey


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s