Determining inductive and deductive.edited (2)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Franklin University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
202
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by samidoughty15
Determining Inductive and Deductive Arguments
Samaria Doughty-DeBerry
HUMN-210-F3WW
Professor Paul Pistone
March 10, 2024
MODULE #6: VALIDITY, STRENGTH, AND
DETERMINING WHETHER ARGUMENTS ARE INDUCTIVE OR DEDUCTIVE
ASSIGNMENT 1:
A. Determine whether the following deductive arguments are valid or invalid.
1. New York City is either in the U.S.A. or France. But it's not in France. It follows that New York City is
in France.
This argument is invalid the reasoning being is because it's contradicting, so the conclusion is not true based on the premises. 2. If the moon is made of green snot, then there are boogers on the moon. The moon is made of green
snot; therefore, there are boogers on the moon.
This argument is valid. A premise has been used to prove this conclusion, and it helps to establish the conclusion. 3. If a car is made by FORD, then it comes with a warranty. Corvette cars are not made by FORD.
Therefore, Corvette cars do not come with a warranty.
This argument is Invalid
B. Determine whether the following inductive arguments are strong or weak.
1. The Governor of the state of Michigan has stated that the water supply of Flint (a city in Michigan)
does not constitute a major threat to the public health. Furthermore, his Cabinet members agree with
him on this point. Accordingly, we conclude that the water supply of Flint (a city in Michigan) does not
constitute a major threat to the public health.
This argument is weak because it has no evidence that water is not a big problem.
2. Two weeks after Pope Francis visited Mexico City to warn against the ills of drug-trafficking and
violence, the city suffered a severe earthquake. Therefore, Pope Francis caused the severe quake in
Mexico City.
This argument is weak; no one can say that one person visiting was able to cause a natural disaster.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
3. 45 million turkeys are killed each year for Thanksgiving. Therefore, the next turkey killed is certain to
be for Thanksgiving.
This argument is weak because many turkeys have been killed when it was nowhere near Thanksgiving. Also, it is not the only holiday people use turkey for. ASSIGNMENT 2:
Determine whether the following arguments are inductive or deductive and
correspondingly valid/invalid or strong/weak.
1. Most birds can fly and an ostrich is a bird. So, ostriches most probably can fly.
This is an inductive argument, and it is also invalid because it goes off of the premise that all birds can fly, which is not correct. 2. If the Taliban take power in Afghanistan, then they will eventually take power in all Central Asia. And,
if the Taliban take power in all Central Asia, then they will take over the rest of the world. Thus, once
the Taliban take power in Afghanistan, they will take over the rest of the world.
This argument is deductive and invalid because it does not provide enough logical evidence that it would be possible for the Taliban to take over the whole world after gaining power over Afghanistan.
3. Either Maria will earn an A in this logic course or she will earn a B, C, D, E, or I. Maria did not earn a B,
C, D, E, or I. So, she must have earned an A.
This argument is deductive and valid.
ADAPTED FROM http://www.uky.edu/~rosdatte/phi120/lesson4a.htm
Dr. Talavera/March 8, 2016