So, the premises do not need to support the conclusion to be considered an argument? If that is the case, then that would just be a bad argument, right? There just needs to be a premise and a conclusion. Maybe adding an example of a bad argument here and having us still distinguish that it is an argument would be helpful to get this point across? Or maybe introducing valid vs sound arguments before this, or distinguishing that we want to determine how to spot a valid argument, which is different than a sound argument. I think the statement at the end of the video may confuse people as an argument is valid if there is at least one conclusion and one premise, regardless of support. right? Wouldn't looking for support imply we are looking to see if an argument is sound or not opposed to valid?
9
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
So, the premises do not need to support the conclusion to be considered an argument? If that is the case, then that would just be a bad argument, right? There just needs to be a premise and a conclusion. Maybe adding an example of a bad argument here and having us still distinguish that it is an argument would be helpful to get this point across? Or maybe introducing valid vs sound arguments before this, or distinguishing that we want to determine how to spot a valid argument, which is different than a sound argument. I think the statement at the end of the video may confuse people as an argument is valid if there is at least one conclusion and one premise, regardless of support. right? Wouldn't looking for support imply we are looking to see if an argument is sound or not opposed to valid?