Argument Formalizer

Source

Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor. She specializes in the neurophysiology of vision and acquires, let us suppose, all the physical information there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes, or the sky, and use terms like 'red', 'blue', and so on. [...] What will happen when Mary is released from her black and white room or is given a color television monitor? Will she learn anything or not? It seems just obvious that she will learn something about the world and our visual experience of it. But then is it inescapable that her previous knowledge was incomplete. But she had all the physical information. Ergo there is more to have than that, and Physicalism is false.

As written, the conclusion doesn't follow from these premises.

Steps marked ‘assumed’ state what you'd have to assume to reach the conclusion.

Frank Jackson, "Epiphenomenal Qualia", Philosophical Quarterly 32(127), 1982

  1. It seems just obvious that when Mary is released from her black and white room or given a color television monitor, she will learn something about the world and our visual experience of it.

    #

  2. Mary had all the physical information.

    #

  3. It is inescapable that Mary's previous knowledge was incomplete.

    #
  4. assumed

    If [1] and [2] and [3], then there is more information to have than all the physical information, and Physicalism is false.

    Assumed so the listed premises lead to the conclusion.

    #

  5. Therefore, there is more information to have than all the physical information, and Physicalism is false. [1,2,3,4]

    #
As written, before the assumed premise

  1. It seems just obvious that when Mary is released from her black and white room or given a color television monitor, she will learn something about the world and our visual experience of it.

  2. Mary had all the physical information.

  3. Therefore, it is inescapable that Mary's previous knowledge was incomplete. [1]

  4. Therefore, there is more information to have than all the physical information, and Physicalism is false. [2,3]

What's missing

The conclusion introduces the concept 'incomplete' (as applied to Mary's previous knowledge), which does not appear in premise 1. Premise 1 says she 'will learn something about the world and our visual experience of it,' but does not use the word 'incomplete' or any equivalent term. The inference from 'will learn something' to 'previous knowledge was incomplete' requires an unstated bridge premise (e.g., 'if one can learn something new, one's previous knowledge was incomplete'). This is a true and plausible bridge, making the argument valid with unstated reasoning rather than valid.

atomicity precondition failed closed: conclusion depends on non-atomic or uncertain steps [4]

Formalize another