Take A (“Some beliefs are uncertain”), B (“Nothing uncertain is worth dying for”), and F (“No belief is worth dying for”):
- From A and B: If some beliefs are uncertain, and nothing uncertain is worth dying for, then those uncertain beliefs are not worth dying for.
- F generalizes this to say that no belief at all is worth dying for, which is consistent if we accept that other beliefs also do not qualify.
- There is no contradiction, and the reasoning forms a consistent set with A providing a case, B providing a rule, and F giving the general conclusion.