Why would it be unreasonable to insist that every argument should be deductively valid?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer is Insisting that every argument should be deductively valid would be unreasonable for several reasons:

1. **Nature of Deductive Validity**: Deductive validity is a strict standard where the conclusion must necessarily follow from the premises. If the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. However, not all types of discourse or inquiry lend themselves to such stringent criteria. Many arguments are inductive or abductive and do not guarantee the truth of the conclusion even if the premises are true.

2. **Scope of Knowledge**: Deductive arguments are limited to what is already known or assumed to be true. They do not allow for the introduction of new knowledge or information, which is essential in scientific discovery and many practical decision-making processes.

3. **Complexity of Real-World Issues**: Many real-world problems are too complex to be captured by simple deductive arguments. They often require nuanced understanding and the integration of various types of evidence that may not fit into a deductive framework.

4. **Inductive and Abductive Reasoning**: Much of our reasoning is inductive (drawing general conclusions from specific instances) or abductive (inferring the most likely explanation). These forms of reasoning are essential for learning, predicting, and explaining phenomena. They cannot be reduced to deductive validity without losing their utility.

5. **Practicality**: In everyday life, we often have to make decisions based on incomplete information or time-sensitive situations. Insisting on deductive validity in such cases would be impractical and could hinder the ability to act efficiently and effectively.

6. **Persuasion and Rhetoric**: Arguments are not only used to establish truth but also to persuade others. Rhetorical and persuasive techniques often rely on emotional appeal, ethical considerations, and other forms of argumentation that are not deductively valid but can be effective and appropriate in context.

7. **Creativity and Innovation**: Deductive reasoning is inherently conservative because it is confined to the logical implications of existing knowledge. Creativity and innovation often require thinking outside the box and making leaps that are not deductively valid but can lead to new insights and discoveries.

8. **Ethical and Moral Reasoning**: Ethical and moral reasoning often involves balancing conflicting values and principles that cannot be resolved through deductive validity alone. It requires a more flexible approach that can accommodate different perspectives and the complexities of human experience.

In summary, while deductive validity is a powerful tool in reasoning, it is not the only or always the most appropriate standard for evaluating arguments. A reasonable approach to argumentation recognizes the value of various types of reasoning and the contexts in which they are most effectively applied.

Why Would It Be Unreasonable to Insist That Every Argument