Research Group
in Analytic Philosophy

Abstract

This paper explores an idea of Stoic descent that is largely but unjustly neglected nowadays, the idea that an argument is valid when the conditional formed by the conjunction of its premises as antecedent and its conclusion as consequent is true. As it will be argued, once some basic features of our naive understanding of validity are properly spelled out, and a suitable account of conditionals is adopted, the equivalence between valid arguments and true conditionals makes perfect sense. The account of validity that I will outline, which develops the Stoic thesis at a fairly high degree of generality, accords with standard formal treatments of deductive validity and encompasses an independently grounded characterization of inductive validity.