0
What else can I help you with?
Can a conclusion in an argument be a question?
Usually, a conclusion is the ending chapter of an argument, so theoretically, no, but technically it is possible by a rhetorical question. If it was an argument, you would have to be a quick thinker to come up with a question. Hope it helps!
If deductive argument is invalid then?
It depends on what you are deducing and why. It just means your argument fails and anything depending on it does too. So you need to either find a valid argument or show that one cannot be formed.
When these type of words are used in an argument they are indicator that the premises had been made and a conclusion will soon follow?
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".
What is the difference between valid and sound in a argument?
Valid means that the argument leads to a true conclusion, given that its premises are true, but if an argument is valid that does not necessarily mean the conclusion is correct, as its premises may be wrong. A sound argument, on the other hand, in addition to being valid all of its premises are true and hence its conclusion is also true.
What makes a conclusion important?
A conclusion is important because it summarizes key points, reinforces the main argument, and leaves a lasting impression on the reader. It provides closure to the discussion and can guide the reader on how to interpret the information presented.
What are Truth Validity and Soundness?
In Debate, specifically in a logical argument, Truth is a premise that corresponds to the way the world actually is. Validity in an argument is that if the premises are true, then so is the conclusion (it is possible for the arguments to be valid even if the premises are false). Soundness is when the premises is true and the argument is valid. To reiterate, arguments cannot be true (only statements can be true), but they can be valid and sound. When an statement is true it goes along with the way the world really is. When an argument is valid, then the premises and the conclusion are logically connected in such a way that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Saying an argument is valid does not guarantee that the premises are true. When an argument is sound, the premises are true and the argument is valid, so the conclusion must also be true.
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.
Can you provide an example of a cyclical argument and explain how it perpetuates a never-ending loop of reasoning?
A cyclical argument is when the conclusion is also used as one of the premises in the argument. This creates a never-ending loop of reasoning because the conclusion is based on the initial premise, which is then used to support the conclusion again. For example, "I know the book is true because it says so in the book." This type of argument doesn't provide any new evidence or reasoning, leading to a circular and unending logic loop.
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
All valid arguments are sound arguments?
No, but all sound arguments are valid arguments. A valid argument is one where the conclusion follows from the premises. A sound argument is a valid argument where the premises are accepted as true.
What are conclusion starters?
To conclude So summarize In conclusion As I said To summarize; Finally, In conclusion; In closing; Re-stating (and then restate the facts you are trying to get accross).
Can an argument have an implied conclusion?
Yes, an argument can trace its conclusion without explicitly mentioning it. Sometimes, the conclusion is not without delay stated but can be figured out from the information given. This is known as an implied conclusion. Implied conclusions work by making a logical connection between the factors to guide the reader or listener to a unique understanding. While some arguments plainly state their conclusion, others require the audience to make a logical deduction primarily based on the details provided. It's essential to remember that arguments are generally clearer when the conclusion is directly stated. However, implied conclusions can be used to motivate people to think critically and actively interact with the reasoning process.
