Valid and Sound Arguments

Philosophers draw a distinction between reasoning that it logically correct but may lead to the wrong conclusion, and reasoning that it also logically correct but leads to the right ones.

In a valid argument, the conclusion inescapably follows from the premises. But these premises may be wrong. If all restaurants serve great food and Michel’s is a restaurant, it inescapably follows that Michael’s serves good food. Yet, Michael’s restaurant may serve terrible food. Although the argument is technically valid, it is flawed, which you would soon find out if you chose to dine at Michael’s.

When people get into an argument, one of them may at some point say, "Your argument doesn’t make sense—it’s not valid." Often, he or she means is that the argument is not sound. A sound argument is a valid argument whose premises are true. Since all men are mortal (major premise) and Socrates is a man (minor premise), Socrates must be mortal (conclusion). Philosophers sometimes use fancier terms, such as universal and existentialist premises, but major and minor will do for our purposes.

All sound arguments are valid, but not all valid arguments are sound. Although people often make invalid arguments, most of their differences and disagreements, for example in politics, have to do with their premises, which often their attitudes and beliefs.

How someone comes to adopt his or her basic or primary premises in approaching life is not straightforward. It reflects a complex combination of that person’s life experience (including views and opinions of others who have been influential), what they infer from their observations of the world, how God may be invisibly prompting them or acting through other people, and how he or she has responded to such promptings or actions.

When it comes to religion, premises make all the difference. If you do not believe a divine creator exists, you are unlikely to view Jesus as representing or reflecting one. Your premises will require you to conclude that Jesus was only a man. You may conclude he was a gifted teacher, a persuasive orator, or an admirable ethical thinker, but you will not view him as divine.

The Christian will regard Jesus as a divine ambassador, the agnostic as someone who may or may not be divine, and the atheist as a person who couldn’t possibly exemplify a God who does not exist.