Uh, you didn't get my point.

Yes, validity has to do with the form, i.e., the truth *preserving* structure of the argument.

If two arguments have the *same form,* then, if both arguments have true premises, then the conclusins would both be true.

One couldn't preserve the truth of the conclusion while the other did not.

So, I was pointing out that since my *form* was the same as yours, and if the premises were true in both arguments, then the conclusion would also be true.

But, if you denied my conclusion, and if the form was valid, and if my premises were essentially the same as yours, then a premise had to be false.

In this case, I proved that it was premise [1].

This means, and you agreed, that you denied Morey's argument.

So, I wasn't wrong.

Please re-read my post. I'm sure you can get it.

(btw, Moreyite = follower/disciple/pupil of Morey; which I assume you are.)

__________________
Regards,

J.J.
PCA
Suffix