Validity as (material!) truth‐preservation in virtue of form

Abstract According to a standard story, part of what we have in mind when say that an argument is valid it necessarily truth ‐ preserving : if the premises are true, conclusion must also be true. But—the story continues—that's not enough, since ‘Roses red, therefore roses coloured’, for example, while may truth‐preserving, so virtue form. Thus arrive at contemporary characterisation validity: NTP Here I argue can and should drop N; resulting account simpler, less problematic, performs just as well with examples.