Honest, reasonable, educated and moral people should simply agree that they have to accept a fact if it is undeniably true, an argument if it is sound and agree to adhere to some minimal system of morality, such as accepting a fact if it is true and an argument if it is valid or sound. These days, the argument is won by the person claiming the most offence, using their victimhood as a sign of virtue. Shouldn't arguments have to be sound before you can win the argument?
Does anyone these days even know the difference between a sound and a valid argument?
Does anyone these days even know the difference between a sound and a valid argument?
No comments:
Post a Comment