Question

For me, it makes sense to say for example:

1.From a follows b.
2.Not b.
3.Therefore not a.
I can't explain it, but it's logical. Now I've read that there are different kind's of logic out there and this here for example might be the classical logic. What about Buddhist logic for example? What defines, that my inference from (1, 2) to (3) is valid? I was assuming, that when not b, there could never be a because otherwise it would have lead to b which leads to a contradiction with (2) but are there other logics, where that inference could be invalid?

Answer 1

In logic, deductive inferences can be classified as valid or invalid. A valid inference guarantees the truth of the conclusion if the premises are true. Different systems of logic may have different rules and principles, so what may be valid in one system might not be valid in another.

Step-by-step explanation:

In logic, deductive inferences can be classified as valid or invalid. A valid inference is one where the structure of the argument guarantees the truth of the conclusion if the premises are true. An invalid inference, on the other hand, does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion even if the premises are true.

In the example you provided, the inference is valid in classical logic because assuming (1) if a follows b and (2) not b, it logically follows that (3) not a. However, there are other systems of logic, such as Buddhist logic, that may have different rules and may consider this inference to be invalid.

It's important to note that different systems of logic have different rules and principles, so what may be a valid inference in one system might not be valid in another.