(August 12, 2012 at 9:05 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: But none of that has to do with the logic.
1. All swans are black
2. X is a swan
3. Therefore, X is black
...is a perfectly valid argument. The logic doesn't change based on whether (1) and (2) are actually true in our universe. Logic doesn't care about that.
The truth value (soundness) of the conclusion does - and if you're going to make statements such as this (emphasis mine):
(August 12, 2012 at 9:05 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: Well, I already posted the results of one particular set of responses, which was a logical argument that from some subset of my responses, the existence of a necessary being must exist.
You fucking well better be able to demonstrate the truth of the propositions.
Otherwise, the truth value of the conclusion is necessarily indeterminate, and you've got nothing - other than of course that your beliefs should include belief in a necessary being to be consistent. Whoop de fucking do.
Incidentally, I'll note that your statement above reaches well beyond what the authors originally proposed to prove - and if that isn't deceptive, I don't know what is.
