Yes, of course.
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.
A deductive argument is and argument that the premises are claimed to give sufficient support for the conclusion to follow. The premises are repeated in the conclusion. Often the conclusion does not have any new information. eg The moon is circular when it is full the moon is circular therefore the moon is full.
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.
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.
Having true premises in constructing a valid argument is important because the validity of an argument depends on the truth of its premises. If the premises are not true, then the argument is not sound and cannot be relied upon to reach a valid conclusion. In other words, true premises are essential for ensuring that an argument is logically sound and can be considered valid.
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.
A deductive argument is and argument that the premises are claimed to give sufficient support for the conclusion to follow. The premises are repeated in the conclusion. Often the conclusion does not have any new information. eg The moon is circular when it is full the moon is circular therefore the moon is full.
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.
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.
Having true premises in constructing a valid argument is important because the validity of an argument depends on the truth of its premises. If the premises are not true, then the argument is not sound and cannot be relied upon to reach a valid conclusion. In other words, true premises are essential for ensuring that an argument is logically sound and can be considered valid.
No, baptism, if validly received, cannot be repeated according to most Christian denominations.
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.
An invalid argument refers to a reasoning structure where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises, rendering the argument unsound. In formal logic, this means that even if the premises are true, the conclusion could still be false. An invalid argument undermines the credibility of the reasoning process and indicates a flaw in the argument's construction. Thus, it cannot be relied upon to establish truth.
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.
Contradictory premises are statements that cannot both be true at the same time. For example, "All cats are mammals" and "No mammals have fur" are contradictory premises because they cannot both be true simultaneously.
No, a bar cannot legally hold your ID when you enter the premises.
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.