Conclusion indicators
These types of words are called conclusion indicators. They signal to the listener or reader that the argument is reaching a conclusion based on the presented premises. Examples of conclusion indicators include "thus," "therefore," and "so".
An argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises. It is invalid if the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.
A deductive argument is a logical reasoning process where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Deductive arguments are characterized by their validity, meaning that the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.
Yes, an argument can have suppressed or missing premises. An argument with suppressed premises does not explicitly state all the premises needed for the conclusion to logically follow, while an argument with missing premises does not include all the premises required for a valid argument. This can result in potential gaps or weaknesses in the reasoning presented.
If a deductive argument is invalid, it means that the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. This indicates that the argument structure is flawed or that the premises do not support the conclusion in the intended manner. In such cases, the argument does not provide a sound basis for justifying the conclusion.
A strong argument is supported by reasoning and evidence, is logically sound, and addresses counterarguments effectively. A weak argument lacks evidence, relies on emotion or fallacious reasoning, or fails to address opposing views adequately. It's important to evaluate the validity of the premises, the logical structure, and the relevance of the evidence when determining the strength of an argument.
A strong argument is supported by reasoning and evidence, is logically sound, and addresses counterarguments effectively. A weak argument lacks evidence, relies on emotion or fallacious reasoning, or fails to address opposing views adequately. It's important to evaluate the validity of the premises, the logical structure, and the relevance of the evidence when determining the strength of an argument.
A deductive argument is a logical reasoning process where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Deductive arguments are characterized by their validity, meaning that the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.
Conclusion indicators
Words like "because," "since," and "therefore" are indicators of premises and conclusions in arguments. They help link reasons (premises) to conclusions to make a persuasive case. Paying attention to these words can help you discern the structure and flow of an argument.
It is invalid because the conclusion does not follow logically from the premise.
Generally, the principles of Logic are taught at year-long University courses, so the very brief explanation offered here is bound to be superficial and may not be as easy to understand. Deductive reasoning explores the implications of statements about the world. If the connection between the statements follows a logical pattern, then if the first statement is true, the second one must necessarily be true. The statement from which we draw the implications is called a premise. The second statement (which must necessarily be true if the premise is, or premises are) is called a conclusion. A Syllogism is one type of Logical argument although it's not the only one. The premises and conclusion always follow the form "All x are y" or "No x are y", or "Some x are y". For example, if you said "All Arabs are Muslims" and "No Muslims are Christians" are your premises, then you could logically come to the conclusion that "No Arabs are Christians." That's a syllogism, and a valid argument because if the premises are true, then so is the conclusion. But although the structure of the argument is good (it is valid), unfortunately as it happens one of the premises, the statement "All Arabs are Muslims" is false. As a result the conclusion is false.
A "conjecture" is a conclusion reached simply from observations...this is a process known as "inductive reasoning". An example would be a weather forecast. The difference between "inductive reasoning" and "deductive reasoning" is that with deductive reasoning, the answer must "necessarily" follow from a set of premises. Inductive reasoning is the process by which you make a mathematical "hypothesis" given a set of observations
conclusion
I follow the instructions in my Owner's Manual.
I follow, as do almost all methodologies, the basic premises laid out by the Project Management Institute.
Non sequitur is Latin for "it does not follow". A statement is said to be a non sequitur if the conclusion does not follow from the premise.
Yes, the word 'follow through' (or follow-through) is a compound noun, a word for the continuing of an action or task to its conclusion; a word for a thing.