premise is invalid

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "premise is invalid" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it in contexts where you are discussing logical arguments or reasoning, indicating that a foundational assumption is not valid. Example: "In this argument, the premise is invalid, which undermines the conclusion drawn from it."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

1 human-written examples

This premise is invalid if patients refill their medication, particularly in the case of low out-of-pocket costs, but are reluctant regarding intake.

BMC Cancer

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

58 human-written examples

But in practice this assumption is invalid.

BMC Women's Health

As Reid (1983, pp. 178 9) observes, the argument from (1) and (2) to (3) is invalid, since the first premise speaks of apparent change, whereas the second premise concerns actual change.

SEP

Doing this, one may may say that the argument is invalid, having true premises but a false conclusion.

SEP

If Pseudo-Scotus' argument is invalid, it is possible for the premise to be true and conclusion false.

SEP

Opponents reply that this argument is invalid; it is possible for the premises to be true even though the conclusion is false.

SEP

But if it is invalid, it is necessarily so, since the premise is a necessary sentence; therefore, we have a consequence with a necessary consequent, thus satisfying the necessary truth-preservation criterion, but which is plainly invalid.

SEP

If Pseudo-Scotus' argument is valid then, since its premise is true, its conclusion is true – which means it is invalid.

SEP

This is transparently bad, but the problem is not that it is invalid: the problem is rather that the first premise, though superficially plausible, is false.

SEP

He argues that there is no theory of invalidity no systematic way to show that an argument is invalid other than to show that it has true premises and a false conclusion (1981, 164).

SEP

This is very much in the spirit of modern logical theory: all that it takes to show that a certain form is invalid is a single instance of that form with true premises and a false conclusion.

SEP

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using the phrase "premise is invalid", ensure you can clearly articulate why the premise is flawed and provide evidence to support your claim.

Common error

Avoid simply stating that a "premise is invalid" without providing any explanation or supporting evidence. Always offer a reason or counter-argument to demonstrate the flaw in the premise.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "premise is invalid" functions as an assertion or judgment within a logical argument or discussion. It's used to indicate that a foundational assumption is flawed, thereby undermining the conclusion derived from it. Ludwig AI provides real-world examples showing its use in academic and general contexts.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

Science

65%

News & Media

25%

Encyclopedias

10%

Less common in

Wiki

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "premise is invalid" is a common and grammatically sound expression used to challenge the foundation of an argument. As confirmed by Ludwig AI, it appears primarily in scientific and news contexts, indicating its role in analytical discussions. While seemingly straightforward, effective use requires clearly articulating why the premise is flawed, supported by evidence or logical reasoning. Related phrases include "the underlying assumption is flawed" or "the foundation is unsound", offering alternative ways to express the same concept. Therefore, understanding both the grammatical correctness and the contextual usage of "premise is invalid" is crucial for clear and effective communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

The underlying assumption is flawed

Focuses on the flaw in the assumption rather than the invalidity of the premise.

The foundation is unsound

Emphasizes the weakness of the basis upon which something is built.

The argument rests on shaky ground

Highlights the instability of the argument's base.

The initial proposition is incorrect

Directly states the incorrectness of the starting point.

The fundamental principle is wrong

Points out the error in the core principle.

The basis for the claim is false

Indicates the falsehood of the claim's supporting basis.

The rationale is indefensible

Suggests the reasoning cannot be defended.

The supposition is untenable

Indicates that the supposition cannot be maintained or defended.

The groundwork is faulty

Emphasizes the defects in the foundational work.

The starting point is misguided

Suggests the initial direction or approach is incorrect.

FAQs

How can I use "premise is invalid" in a sentence?

You can use "premise is invalid" to argue against a point, like: "The argument fails because its central "premise is invalid"." Or, you might say, "The researcher's conclusion doesn't hold because the initial "premise is invalid"."

What's a simpler way to say "premise is invalid"?

Alternatives include "the assumption is wrong", "the foundation is flawed", or "the argument is based on a false assumption". These options are less formal but convey the same basic meaning.

What's the difference between saying a premise is 'invalid' versus 'incorrect'?

While both suggest something is wrong, "invalid" typically implies a logical flaw or structural issue in the reasoning. "Incorrect" simply means factually untrue. Thus, a "premise is invalid" due to faulty logic, while an incorrect premise contains false information.

Is it always necessary to explain why a premise is invalid?

Yes, it's always best practice to explain why a "premise is invalid". Simply stating it without justification weakens your argument. Provide evidence or reasoning to support your claim that the premise is flawed.