Implicit Premises: Revision history

26 September 2022

• curprev 20:3420:34, 26 September 2022‎ GSalmieri talk contribs‎ 5,186 bytes +3‎ No edit summary
• curprev 20:3420:34, 26 September 2022‎ GSalmieri talk contribs‎ 5,183 bytes −11‎ No edit summary
• curprev 20:3320:33, 26 September 2022‎ GSalmieri talk contribs‎ 5,194 bytes +33‎ No edit summary
• curprev 20:3320:33, 26 September 2022‎ GSalmieri talk contribs‎ 5,161 bytes +45‎ No edit summary

17 August 2022

• curprev 21:5221:52, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 5,116 bytes +263‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:5021:50, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,853 bytes −9‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:4921:49, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,862 bytes 0‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:4921:49, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,862 bytes +71‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:4621:46, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,791 bytes +3‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:4621:46, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,788 bytes −26‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:4521:45, 17 August 2022‎ Pooyamo talk contribs‎ 4,814 bytes +269‎ No edit summary

10 August 2022

• curprev 12:3412:34, 10 August 2022‎ Tristandeliege talk contribs‎ 4,545 bytes 0‎ No edit summary

• curprev 12:3412:34, 10 August 2022‎ Tristandeliege talk contribs‎ 4,545 bytes +4,545‎ Created page with "'''§2.3''' You may have noticed that there’s something a bit unnatural about the three sentences we looked at above expressing the argument that alcohol should be illegal. It is unlikely that anyone making this argument would state it so longwindedly. More likely he’d simply say: (iv) “Alcohol should be illegal because it’s a drug” or perhaps (v) “Alcohol should be illegal because all drugs should be.” Both of these ways of stating the argument omit one o..."