Claim: Pure logic is only concerned with the structure of arguments. The validity of an argument is independent of the truth or falsity of its premises.

In response to the claim above, I would agree that pure logic is only concerned with the structure of arguments. This is because when making a deductive argument, ones premise can be truth or false and their argument would still be valid. This is because the validity of an argument is only based off of whether the premises are structured in a way that is logical and makes sense. For example if I have two premises, one of which being that martians have green skin and the other being that some tree frogs have green skin, then using logic, I can argue that some tree frogs are martians. While we know that the argument is false, the premise of some tree frogs having green skin is true however the other premise is actually an unknown since we do not know what martians look like. Despite having only one true and concrete premise, the argument can still be considered valid since we logically took in the information of the premises and came to a conclusion. Therefore the validity of an argument is independent of the truth or falsity of its premises.

This type of logic is especially prevalent in science, where scientists start of with a general argument and then through creating/testing premises come to a concrete conclusion.