0
A deductively valid argument is if the premises are true then the conclusion is certainly true, not possibly true. The definition does not say that the conclusion is true.
Wiki User
β 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Are Valid arguments strong or weak?
A valid argument is certainly stronger than an invalid argument. but an argument can be valid and still be relatively weak. Validity and strength are not the same, although they are both good features for an argument to have.
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.
Is a valid argument strong or weak?
Valid arguments must include facts and supporting documentation in order to strengthen the validity. If not, then the argument can be challenged.
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.
Deductively sound arguments are also deductively valid?
Yes, deductively sound arguments are deductively valid. A deductively valid argument is one where it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. If the argument is deductively valid and the premises are also true, then the argument is sound.
What is deductive validity?
A deductively valid argument is if the premises are true then the conclusion is certainly true, not possibly true. The definition does not say that the conclusion is true.
Can a deductively argument have false premises?
Yes, a deductive argument can have false premises. However, the conclusion does not follow logically if the premises are false, making the argument unsound.
Can a valid deductive argument have a false conclusion?
No, a valid deductive argument cannot have a false conclusion. If the argument is valid, it means that the conclusion logically follows from the premises. If the conclusion is false, it means that the argument is not valid.
How can you tell if an argument is valid?
An argument is valid if the conclusion follows logically from the premises. In a valid argument, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. This can be determined by evaluating the logical structure of the argument.
What is the difference between induction and deduction?
Generally this is how the concept of Induction and Deduction will move * Induction - particular to general. * Deduction - general to particular. However this is actually untrue. Either arguments starting with or ending with a Partcular or generalisation. An argument that is Deductively invalid can be Inductively valid. Eg; Inductivley valid, but Deductively invalid. (Particular) My apple is red Your apple is red (General) All apples are red (General) If something is red, it is a Tomato. Your car is red (Particular) Your car is also a Tomato Obviously untrue statements, however to constitute as Inductively valid one must only display a logical correlation of concepts. Eg; Deductively valid. (General) If you don't have a ticket you can't ride the bus. You don't have a ticket. (Particular)so, you can't ride the bus. ...maybe read the Wikipedia page too! Its hard to define but easy to understand.
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.
Are Valid arguments strong or weak?
A valid argument is certainly stronger than an invalid argument. but an argument can be valid and still be relatively weak. Validity and strength are not the same, although they are both good features for an argument to have.
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 a valid argument be weak?
Yes, a valid argument can still be weak if the premises provided are not strong or relevant enough to support the conclusion. Validity refers to the logical structure of an argument, while the strength of an argument refers to the quality and persuasiveness of the premises.
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.
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.
