[general_re]

Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion. Further, since the truth of the conclusion is the issue, and not the premise, and since the truth of the conclusion can be verified or falsified without reference to that particular premise, why is it invalid to take the conclusion as a working hypothesis for further study?

[AndrewC]

Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion.

The conclusion is only a conclusion when mated with a premise, otherwise it is an assertion. Typically, in logic, an argument is a series of connected statements culminating in a proof. A conditional statement is logically always true whenever the premise is false. The statement "If general_re has a billion dollars then general_re is a rich man" does not make "general_re is a rich man".

Study whatever you want.