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.
The argument denying the antecedent is invalid.
A valid argument becomes invalid when it contains a logical fallacy, such as a false premise or faulty reasoning. Additionally, if the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises provided, the argument is considered invalid.
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.
A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, while an invalid argument is one where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.
Valid arguments are not described as strong or weak. Validity refers to the logical structure of an argument - if the premises logically lead to the conclusion. An argument can be valid but still weak if the premises are not well-supported or sound.
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)
The argument denying the antecedent is invalid.
A valid argument becomes invalid when it contains a logical fallacy, such as a false premise or faulty reasoning. Additionally, if the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises provided, the argument is considered invalid.
No, but it can be unsound and valid.
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.
A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, while an invalid argument is one where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.
poor wording ???
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.
Invalid
No, arguments can either be strong or weak, however, a valid argument would be considered a sound argument. The opposite would be an invalid argument.
No, arguments can either be strong or weak, however, a valid argument would be considered a sound argument. The opposite would be an invalid argument.
Valid arguments are not described as strong or weak. Validity refers to the logical structure of an argument - if the premises logically lead to the conclusion. An argument can be valid but still weak if the premises are not well-supported or sound.