0
Sound.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
The kalam cosmological argument is considered by many philosophers and theologians to be both valid and sound. The argument uses logic to try to demonstrate that the universe had a cause and that this cause must be a transcendent, uncaused, and timeless being, which many identify as God. However, there is ongoing debate and criticism within the philosophical community about its premises and implications.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
All valid arguments are sound arguments?
This statement is not correct. A valid argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of whether the premises are true or not. A sound argument, on the other hand, is a valid argument with true premises. So, while all sound arguments are valid, not all valid arguments are sound.
What word is used to classify an argument if it is valid and all of its premises are true?
The word used to classify an argument if it is valid and all of its premises are true is "sound." A sound argument is when the logical structure of the argument is valid and all the premises are true, leading to a logically sound conclusion.
How can you tell if you are dealing with a sound argument?
A sound argument is one that is logically valid and has true premises. To determine if you are dealing with a sound argument, you need to check if the premises are true and if the reasoning is valid. If both conditions are met, then the argument is sound.
What is the difference between valid and sound in a argument?
In logic, a valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. So, a sound argument is not only valid, but it also has true premises, making it both logically correct and factually accurate.
Why cant you have an argument which is invalid and sound?
An argument that is invalid is one where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. A sound argument is one that is valid and has true premises. So, by definition, an argument cannot be both invalid and sound at the same time because for an argument to be sound it must be valid.
All valid arguments are sound arguments?
This statement is not correct. A valid argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of whether the premises are true or not. A sound argument, on the other hand, is a valid argument with true premises. So, while all sound arguments are valid, not all valid arguments are sound.
When you are building an argument for an issue that is significant to you do you think it is more important to be valid or sound?
For an argument to be valid, it means that if the premises of the argument are true, then the conclusion must be true. Validity has to do with the form of the argument. If one or more of the premises are not true, that does not mean the argument isn't valid. Soundness means that the argument is valid, and all of it's premises are true. It's a little redundant to say "both valid and sound", because if your argument is sound, then it must be valid. It is important for an argument to be not just valid, but also sound, in order for it to be convincing.
Can an argument be invalid and sound?
No, but it can be unsound and valid.
What is sound and unsound?
It describes two kinds of argument in logic. A sound argument is valid (logically coherent) and its premises are true. And unsound argument is not sound.
When building an argument for an issue that's significant to you is it more important to be sound or valid?
For your argument to be valid and thus persuasive, your points must be sound. Otherwise, a thinking person will ignore your conclusion and dismiss your argument.
Can a sound argument have a false conclusion?
A sound argument cannot have a false conclusion. A sound argument refers to a deductive argument which is valid and has all true premises, therefore its conclusion cannot be false.
What is the difference between valid and sound in a argument?
In logic, a valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. So, a sound argument is not only valid, but it also has true premises, making it both logically correct and factually accurate.
This type of argument contains two characteristics it is valid and its premises are all true?
This type of argument is considered sound. It is both valid, meaning the conclusion logically follows from the premises, and all the premises are true, thus providing a solid foundation for the conclusion.
Does any body know what are the strengths and weaknesses of the pragmatic argument?
All sound arguments are valid, but not all valid arguments are sound.
Is it true that valid arguments are said to be strong or weak?
Valid arguments are not described as strong or weak. Validity refers to the logical structure of an argument - if the premises logically lead to the conclusion. An argument can be valid but still weak if the premises are not well-supported or sound.
A valid argument can have a false conclusion True or False?
True. A valid argument can have a false conclusion if the premises logically lead to that conclusion even though it is not true. Validity in logic refers to the structure of the argument, regardless of the truth or falsity of the premises or conclusion.
What word is used to classify an argument if it is valid and all of its premises are true?
The word used to classify an argument if it is valid and all of its premises are true is "sound." A sound argument is when the logical structure of the argument is valid and all the premises are true, leading to a logically sound conclusion.
