Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Similar(60)
"The argument is unsound that because we are forced to cut the people's bread we should also cut their circuses," declared David Eccles.
In either case, the argument is unsound.
Yet critics argue that even this modest argument is unsound.
First, Hume's conceivability to possibility argument is unsound.
In fact, however, Rowe's argument is unsound.
If its steps are interpreted literally, the argument is unsound but valid.
A more satisfying response to the ontological argument would, of course, show not merely that the ontological argument is unsound, but also precisely why it is unsound.
Suppose that one compatibilist reply or another proves that the Consequence Argument is unsound.[20] This alone would not amount to a positive argument for compatibilism.
Note that this parity argument via a reductio ad absurdum, if successful, would show that the ontological argument is unsound, but without indicating which premise or which step in the reasoning is at fault.
The third argument is unsound: Paul argues that since in God each generic principle (ratio generis) is different from any corresponding specific principle (ratio speciei), therefore specific principles too are different from each other.
So even though many compatibilists are committed to thinking that the Consequence Argument is unsound, it nevertheless set the agenda for many contemporary compatibilist theories of free will and moral responsibility.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com