An example of a sound argument would be: "All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore, Socrates is mortal." This argument is sound because it is valid (the conclusion logically follows from the premises) and the premises are true.
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.
Yes, deductively sound arguments are also deductively valid. An argument is sound if and only if all of the premises are true (with respect to all cases of semantics) and the premises certainly prove the conclusion, which then must also be true. An example of a valid, but not sound argument: Everyone who lives on Mars is a martian I live on Mars Therefore I am a martian An example of a sound argument (which then must also be valid): All rodents are mammals A rat is a rodent Therefore a rat is a rodent Recall that semantics are important and must be considered for an argument to sound and valid. Consider the following example: Everyone from London is from England Person A is from London Therefore person A is from England For the sake of this example, assume person A is indeed from London. This still does not mean that this argument is sound, or even valid. There are many places named London that are not in England (eg. London, Ontario, Canada). Thus, the argument is not sound and is invalid.
An argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises. This means that if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. An argument is strong if the premises provide good support for the conclusion, making it likely to be true.
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.
An example of a sound argument would be: "All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore, Socrates is mortal." This argument is sound because it is valid (the conclusion logically follows from the premises) and the premises are true.
An invalid argument is when the facts you are using are invalid or your forms of defense are wrong or incorrect, a valid argument is the opposite of an invalid argument. "There is a windmill in my beard. your argument is invalid." (This is a good example of a bad contradiction)
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.
Yes, deductively sound arguments are also deductively valid. An argument is sound if and only if all of the premises are true (with respect to all cases of semantics) and the premises certainly prove the conclusion, which then must also be true. An example of a valid, but not sound argument: Everyone who lives on Mars is a martian I live on Mars Therefore I am a martian An example of a sound argument (which then must also be valid): All rodents are mammals A rat is a rodent Therefore a rat is a rodent Recall that semantics are important and must be considered for an argument to sound and valid. Consider the following example: Everyone from London is from England Person A is from London Therefore person A is from England For the sake of this example, assume person A is indeed from London. This still does not mean that this argument is sound, or even valid. There are many places named London that are not in England (eg. London, Ontario, Canada). Thus, the argument is not sound and is invalid.
An argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises. This means that if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. An argument is strong if the premises provide good support for the conclusion, making it likely to be true.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The correct spelling of the word is argument.Some example sentences with this word are:There is an argument next door.The political argument wore on for hours.His argument brought up some valid points.
Implicit premises are assumptions that are not explicitly stated in an argument but are necessary for the argument to be valid. For example, in the argument "All humans are mortal, Socrates is a human, therefore Socrates is mortal," an implicit premise is that if something is a human, it is mortal. Another example is in the argument "If it is raining, the ground is wet. The ground is wet, therefore it is raining," the implicit premise is that the only way the ground can be wet is if it is raining.
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.