This book is a collection of essays that examine various subjects in which unreasonableness or low standards of rationality substitute sentimentality for sober thought and thereby restrict action. The essays defend the interconnected values of reasonableness and freedom.

It will be assumed that the questions are legitimate.

This paper points out a recent error that has been occurring in logic and critical thinking textbooks concerning the definition of a deductively valid argument. Namely, a number of authors define a deductively valid argument as one where the conclusion must be true if the premises are true. This definition is mistaken as it attaches necessity to a statement (the conclusion) rather than to the relationship between premises and the conclusion. In addition to detailing this mistake in a number of (...) textbooks, the paper provides three correct definitions of a valid argument. (shrink)

This paper points out a recent error that has been occurring in logic and critical thinking textbooks concerning the definition of a deductively valid argument. Namely, a number of authors define a deductively valid argument as one where the conclusion must be true if the premises are true. This definition is mistaken as it attaches necessity to a statement (the conclusion) rather than to the relationship between premises and the conclusion. In addition to detailing this mistake in a number of (...) textbooks, the paper provides three correct definitions of a valid argument. (shrink)

In ‘Scientific Materialism and the Identity Theory’ Malcolm argues that Smart's brain-mind identity theory is not even false, but is unintelligible. I want to comment on his arguments.

KNOWLEDGE IS NOT ENOUGH. By Samuel B. Gould.