0
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is it important to examine evidence of an argument?
Examining evidence helps to ensure that the argument is well-supported and credible. It allows for a deeper understanding of the topic by providing factual support for claims made. By evaluating the evidence, one can determine the validity and strength of the argument being presented.
What are valid arguments?
Valid arguments are those where the conclusion logically follows from the premises. In other words, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Valid arguments obey the rules of logic and reasoning.
What is a valid argument?
A valid argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises. This means that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Validity refers to the logical structure of the argument rather than the truth of the premises.
What is the difference between valid and sound argument?
A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of whether the premises are true. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. In other words, a sound argument is both valid and has true premises.
When the premise of an argument relies on mention of the character background or personality of a person what is the logical fallacy being committed?
The logical fallacy being committed in this scenario is known as an ad hominem attack. This fallacy involves attacking the character of the person making the argument rather than addressing the actual points being made in the argument. It is considered invalid because it does not address the substance of the argument itself.
A valid argument can be made invalid if it cotains?
poor wording ???
Why is it important to examine evidence of an argument?
Examining evidence helps to ensure that the argument is well-supported and credible. It allows for a deeper understanding of the topic by providing factual support for claims made. By evaluating the evidence, one can determine the validity and strength of the argument being presented.
What are valid arguments?
Valid arguments are those where the conclusion logically follows from the premises. In other words, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Valid arguments obey the rules of logic and reasoning.
Is it true that wills made when people are single are not valid after they get married?
The rules are going to depend upon the specific state or country. In most of the states, a will made prior to a marriage (not in contemplation of marriage) will be held invalid or partially invalid.
What is a valid argument?
A valid argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises. This means that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Validity refers to the logical structure of the argument rather than the truth of the premises.
What is the difference between valid and sound argument?
A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of whether the premises are true. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. In other words, a sound argument is both valid and has true premises.
What is the difference between valid and sound...?
A valid argument is an argument whose conclusion follows logically from the truth of the premises. It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. An example of a valid argument is:1. If Thales was right, then everything is made of water.2. It's not the case that everything was made of water.3. So, Thales wasn't right.This argument has the form: If P then Q, ~Q, therefore ~P. The conclusion is derived using Modus Tollens. All of the premises are true, and so is the conclusion.However, the validity of an argument does not entail the truth of its conclusion. Consider another example of a valid argument:1. If Socrates was a Philosopher, then Socrates was a happy alligator.2. Socrates was a Philosopher.3. So, Socrates was a happy alligator.This argument is valid: it is of the form If P then Q, P, therefore Q. The conclusion is derived using Modus Ponens (a rule for logical inference which preserves truth).However, the conclusion is false. Because it is valid, one of the premises must also be false: and, we can see, premise 1 is the culprit. If we replace it with a better premise, such as "If Socrates was a Philosopher, then Socrates existed", we derive a different and true conclusion (that Socrates existed).A sound argument is an argument with two features: (i) it is valid, and (ii) its premises are all true.It is not clear whether we ought to include other features, like non-circularity, in the necessary conditions for soundness; convention has yet to determine it.In my opinion, a valid argument is any argument that opens a dialogue (without anger of course) where the opposing side can see and understand your side and may actually cause doubt as to whether they were right at all.Opposing argument:Arguments begin with a premise or premises and end with a conclusion. Take the argument above, here we have a premise that states a valid argument is one that opens a dialog, qualifying that opening as non emotional, and concludes that by opening with a non emotional argument of non specified nature the opposing side will understand the correctness of this argument and thereby have doubt about its own argument. Of course, since the premise is far too vague to even lead to a conclusion, there is no doubt by the opposition that another definition is required to effectively explain what a valid argument is.In order to have a valid argument, the truth of the conclusion must be a logical consequence of the premise. Take this argument, for example, that has declared the original argument not valid as a valid argument because the truth of the conclusion quite clearly is not a logical consequence of its premise. That would be the premise. Now this argument will lead to a logical conclusion proving that the above argument was not valid. The above argument may be a deductive argument that has, in that contributors opinion, deduced that the conclusion of that argument is a logical consequence of the premise. Or it may be a inductive argument that claims the conclusion is supported by the premises and if a deductive argument the above argument may or may not be valid or may or may not be sound. In this case, the above argument is neither valid nor sound.The only kind of argument that can logically be called a valid argument is one where the the truth of the conclusion is actually a logical consequence of the premise or premises and its corresponding conditional is necessarily true. An argument then, can only be valid if the negation of the corresponding conditional is a contradiction. For example:It is either good or badIt is not goodTherefore it is bad.In its application we can test if an argument is valid or not by translating the premise and conclusion into sentential or predicate logic sentences. Then constructing from these the negation from the corresponding conditional and finally see if from this a contradiction can be obtained. Or a truth table if feasible can be used to test if the premises come out false in every row. This truth table usually relies upon Boolean functions in terms of true or false. Then alternately construct a truth tree to test if all the branches are closed. If successful this proves the validity of the original argument.In attempting to test the original argument we find that argument is lacking in sufficient premises to test it. We could break the premises down to this:In his opinion any argument is a valid argumentAny argument that opens a dialog with out angerAn argument that allows the opposing side to see his argumentThe opposing argument then doubts their own reasoning.Broken down this way, the premises do not lead to a logical conclusion. If any argument is a valid argument then the opposing argument would be valid as well. Let's try breaking it down this way.Any argument is a valid argument that opens a dialogWithout anger, where the opposing side can see that argumentThus, or possibly causing doubt in the opposing arguments reasoning.Of course, if the original premise is true then there is no point in arguing as any opposition by definition is non valid since it did not open the dialog. However, the conclusion is a logical consequence of the original premise. It is the second premise that makes no sense if the original premise is true, because no opening argument need be made in order for an opposing argument to see that it is an opening argument and by definition the only valid argument made. Thus, the premise must original premise must be false, but the second premise is clearly true leaving the conclusion in a state of illogic.The original argument really can not be broken down by any truth table or truth tree. It is merely an opinion offered for lack of a better explanation. In any argument, if the one making the argument assumes the game is to prove the other person wrong, then the game is lost. Arguments should only be used to derive a truth or truths. When this is understood, those making arguments are never wrong. The premise itself may be either true or false but never wrong. May be valid or not, sound or not sound but never wrong. Since the original argument was offered as merely an opinion it is of course, not wrong. It his however, not a valid argument.
How do you make a social security number valid?
You don't. The number you're assigned by the Social Security Administration will already be valid. A number you get any other way is invalid and can't be made valid. (Even if the number itself is "valid" in the sense "it's an actual social security number", it's not valid for you unless it's your social security number.)
What are the answers to the evaluating arguments quiz chapter 7?
Evaluating Arguments QuizResults Reporter Out of 7 questions, you answered 7 correctly with a final grade of 100% 7 correct (100%) 0 incorrect (0%) 0 unanswered (0%) Your Results:The correct answer for each question is indicated by a . 1 CORRECT It's no use going on about whether this law is just. It was passed democratically. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: The correct answer is B. The assumed premise, Most laws that were passed democratically are just, makes the argument strong. The premise needed for a valid argument, "All democratically passed laws are just," is not as plausible. 2 CORRECT How can you be so critical of Pride and Prejudice? You never read it. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: The correct answer is A. The assumed premise, You are not justified in being critical of any book you have not read, is plausible and makes the argument valid. 3 CORRECT I wouldn't call her reliable. She was late with her last rent check. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: No assumed premise can make the argument either strong or valid. The weakest possible assumption, "If she was late with her rent check last month, she probably isn't reliable," is far too implausible. 4 CORRECT It's not safe to let Dave drive you home. He just had a furious argument with his boss. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: The correct answer is B. The assumed premise, When Dave has just had a furious argument, it's usually not safe to let him drive, makes this a strong argument. It isn't plausible to assume (as you'd have to for a valid argument) that Dave is an unsafe driver every time he's had a furious argument. 5 CORRECT Look, it's snowing. The air will be warmer today. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: The correct answer is B. The assumed premise, When it is snowing, the air becomes warmer, makes this a strong argument. 6 CORRECT We didn't miss the bus. It isn't 8:04 yet. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: The correct answer is B. The assumed premise, If it isn't 8:04, the bus probably has not come yet, makes the argument strong. 7 CORRECT That isn't art. A child could do it. A) Valid B) Strong C) Can't be made either valid or strong Feedback: No assumed premise can make the argument either strong or valid. The weakest possibility, "Very few children could make art," is too vague to be plausible.
Is dis a valid scrabble answer?
According to the rules of Scrabble, the prefix dis- would not be a valid word to play.However an argument could be made that DIS as a commonly accepted acronym (for example: Defence Intelligence Staff or Daytona International Speedway) could be a valid scoring word.
Does the following passage contain an argument if so What is its conclusion He made threats plus he had the motive Not only that but who else had access to a gun If Mitchell didn't do it I dont know?
yes it contains a inductive argument
Does a will made while husband and wife are married still be legal after the two are divorced?
Generally, a will made while married is made invalid by a divorce for any provisions made for your spouse.Generally, a will made while married is made invalid by a divorce for any provisions made for your spouse.Generally, a will made while married is made invalid by a divorce for any provisions made for your spouse.Generally, a will made while married is made invalid by a divorce for any provisions made for your spouse.
