• yewler@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year 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:

    1. If you think femboys are attractive, you’re gay
    2. 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

    1. A -> B
    2. ~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.

    • HaSch@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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

      • yewler@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year 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.