Practice question · Multiple choice
Logic isolates whether a conclusion follows from its premises from whether those premises are true. What does this separation imply for an argument whose conclusion is demonstrably true?
Hints
- Does a true conclusion always require support from the statement preceding it?
- What property belongs strictly to the inference rather than the individual facts?
Show the answer
A. The argument may be completely invalid despite the factual accuracy
Why
Factual truth does not confer validity; an inference fails whenever premises fail to necessitate the conclusion. Confusing truth with structural support conflates soundness with validity, or deduction with mere factual coincidence.
Practise Arguments, Validity and Soundness
The app has 4 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Philosophy I is free to start.
More questions on Arguments, Validity and Soundness
- An argument has all false premises and a false conclusion, yet it is impossible for the premises to be true…
- Of the four classic conditional argument forms — modus ponens, modus tollens, affirming the consequent,…
- Which statements about validity are correct?
- Sort each argument by whether it is deductive or inductive.
- Arrange these steps in the order you would use to evaluate an argument.
- Match each term to its precise meaning.