• 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.