posted by Brenda on .
What is the meaning of validity, truth, and soundness as they relate to the area of logical syllogisms?
Google soundness in logic
Check the second entry, it should answer your question.
Roger means this website:
Thank you for supplying the link Writeacher, that is the reference I had in mind.
It gave a simpler and clearer explanation than I could've given.
Validity and soundness apply to deductive arguments. Inductive arguments don't have any specific argument forms, so we judge their efficacy by something called inductive probability. Truth applies to both argument types, but there is a slight difference. For deductive arguments if the premises are true and the argument form valid, then the argument is sound and the conclusion follows necessarily. For inductive arguments the premises may be true, but the conclusion never follows necessarily. It is based on probability entirely. This is why inductive arguments are termed 'weak arguments' by some authors: there is no way to guarantee the conclusions. Deductive arguments are called strong arguments because their conclusions can be guaranteed with certain condions, i.e. soundness.
However, the real problem is nearly always verifying the truthfulnes of the premises. This difficulty always exists for both argument types. We should also note that there is a strong interplay between the two argument types in practice too. We use induction in forming hypothesis, and then we use deduction to see what conclusions follow necessarily from the hypotheses to determine if it should be accepted or rejected.
This is a good deal more than the poster asked, but I thought I'd show why it's important to distinguish the terms. I Hope this helps.
What is the meaning of validity, truth, and soundness as they relate to the area of logical syllogisms