Miles wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 11:00 pm
Purple Knight wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:16 pm
historia wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:58 pm
Do you agree with the above argument?
Well, yes. It's perfectly valid.
Actually, it isn't valid at all. For one thing, every term in a conclusion must appear in at least one of the premises. The term "Democrats, Independents, and "never Trump" Republicans" doesn't appear in any premise.
.
If you reduce the argument to a perfect categorical one, with nothing implied and everything stated explicitly, I imagine it would read something like this:
1. Trump is the worst outcome. (Distilled from, "Trump poses a unique threat to American democracy.")
2. It is better to eliminate the possibility of the worst outcome, than pursue the best outcome. (Implied premise.)
_____
3. Therefore, it is better to spend your vote helping to prevent the worst outcome, than pursuing the best outcome.
4. Attempting to defeat Trump in the Republican Primary has a better chance to prevent the worst outcome than letting Trump win the nomination, at which point the American People may choose him.
_____
5. It is better to attempt to defeat Trump in the Primary.