Abstract
The subject of this paper is what has been called “the widely held thesis that argument validity is at bottom a matter of form.”1 I am interested in a version of that thesis in which ‘validity’ bears the broad sense that Trudy Govier has called “umbrella validity”:
An argument is valid if its premises are properly connected to its conclusion and provide adequate reasons for it. It is invalid otherwise.2
and which she contrasts both with deductive validity and with formal validity.3
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pinto, R.C. (2001). Logical Form and the Link Between Premisses and Conclusion. In: Argument, Inference and Dialectic. Argumentation Library, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0783-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0783-1_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5713-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0783-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive