Both arguments are making a correlation-causation ... argument was in reference to arguments like (1), which is why ... , so that observation/statement is valid.
... four groups of logical indicators, valid logic forms, some/all relationships ... attention to the author's arguments and how the evidence supports ... point how they support the arguments, not themselves.
For LG ...
Weakening/strengthening tend to deal with causal reasoning. Questions that deal with validity are going to be conditional reasoning oriented because causal arguments are never valid. As such, SA/PSAr/PSAa deal with conditional reasoning.
Subject says it all. I am hypersensitive to noting that several events occurring together is always correlative (yet often mistakenly construed by authors as causal), but I am wondering whether this will ever come back to haunt me.
Hi guys... Maybe these are obvious and I'm missing something but I couldn't really find an answer online so I was hoping someone can help me out with some general questions regarding correlation.
Does anyone have any general advice for quickly and accurately identifying assumptions in arguments within the LR section? I feel like that's a weak spot for me so any advice on how to work on this would be immensely appreciated :}
I went through 4-9 Forms today and I feel overwhelmed.
How did you guys remember all these? Do I just need to watch the Invalid Argument Forms videos to understand? Mind blown.
Hi there, Does anyone find that it is more difficult to determine whether or not an argument is valid using the 'lawgic' method than it is to simply read the question?