0
Not always. They need to be in a flow and all connect, then, at the end, give a breif description of what you have just written. For e.g., A debate about 'Dragons, are they real or not?'
Bad Depate
Dragons are not real! There can't be a big lizard with wings that can fly! It's Impossible for them to breathe fire! They just can't be real!
The bad points with this are there is not title, so you don't know what side of the argument they are on.
It doesn't flow. It's in one big clump, and needs to be spread out and given more detail.
Now, here's an e.g. of a good argument.
Dragons, Are They Real or Not?
I believe the existence of dragons is true, due to some un-explainable thoughts that have been proven that the existence of dragons is real. These are my reasons.
My frist reason is, how can a creature, passed down in the history of time, a creature that is known to every single human culpture, even the ones whom live in ice-bound lands, how can it be that every one of them, has a story to tell about the one creature, all describing the detail of a dragon?
A further reason is that how can a T-Rex, the kings of dinosaurs, the crown of it's skull is scared by Tallen marks, the size of a T-Rex's Tallens, when the only flying dinosaurs are the Pterradactels, when their claws are half the size or so?
My last reason is, how did we discover the fire? Surely, we would have had to seen it from somewhere? And the only creature to have ever been known to breathe fire, or at least make it, is the dragon?
So, althogh others may still argue agents it, but I believe that I have shown that the existence of dragons is real.
All the above written by Wiggleytuff 84 (Danielle)
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoYes, cogent arguments have true premises
Read on for more info.
for a argument to be cogent, it follows the ARG condition
A- Acceptability
R- Relevance
G- Sufficient Grounds
-If an argument is cogent, its premisses must be acceptable
-If an argument is to be cogent, the premisses must be relevant to the conclusion
-If an argument is cogent, the premisses must provide enough of a reason to accept the conclusion
So for an argument to be cogent, it should follow all three conditions stated above, if it fails on any of these, than the argument is non-cogent.
Wiki User
∙ 15y agoCertainly!
A common object of debate in the middle ages centered around the right of priests to own property when they had taken a vow of proverty. The question that defined the debate was 'Did Christ own the clothes that he wore?'
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Are all valid arguments cogent arguments?
No, not all valid arguments are cogent. A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, while a cogent argument is a valid argument with true premises. In other words, cogent arguments are a subset of valid arguments.
What are the distinguished features of cogent and uncogent arguments?
Both are inductive arguments, cogent is strong with all true premises, uncogent is either weak, or strong but with one or more false premises or both.
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.
Do all valid arguments have true conclusions?
No, valid arguments can have false conclusions. Validity refers to the logical connection between the premises and the conclusion, ensuring that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. However, the validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion, as the premises themselves could be false.
What is argument validity?
Argument validity refers to the property of a deductive argument when the conclusion logically follows from the premises. In valid arguments, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Validity does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion, only that the conclusion is well-supported by the premises.
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.
Give 5 examples of sentences with word 'cogent'?
The professor presented a cogent argument that convinced the entire class. Her cogent analysis of the situation highlighted the key factors at play. The report provided cogent evidence to support its findings. His cogent reasoning helped the team reach a consensus during the meeting. The lawyer's cogent presentation swayed the jury in favor of her client.
What are the parts of a deductive argument?
A deductive argument consists of a premise (a statement assumed to be true) and a conclusion (a statement inferred from the premises). The premise provides evidence or reasons to support the conclusion, which must necessarily follow from the premises if they are true. Deductive arguments aim to demonstrate the logical necessity of the conclusion based on the premises provided.
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.
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.
Which logical function returns a true result only when all its arguments are true?
The AND function.
Is all dying declaration proved true?
Whether they are true or not is not the question. The cogent legal fact is that genuine dying declarations are an exception to the hearsay rule and may be admitted as evidence in court.
