Thread: Value of: iginla at the deadline
View Single Post
01-09-2013, 12:52 AM
Registered User
CanadienShark's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,078
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Frodo Baggins View Post
there's 0 logic in this post.
There's logic, it's simply an invalid argument. A valid argument cannot have a potentially false argument with two true premises. I'd believe that the two premises are true, hence it's an invalid argument, since there is no pattern.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, seeing as everything I just spewed was learned in my Critical Thinking class, but I'd call this a "cogent" argument; it is inductive as opposed to deductive (uncertain as opposed to certain), but the argument is strong. As well, both premises are true, which leads me to the conclusion that this is a cogent argument.

To any Philosophy students, please don't rag on me! I'm a simple first year student in a 2nd year philosophy course with no background!

Last edited by CanadienShark: 01-09-2013 at 12:58 AM.
CanadienShark is offline   Reply With Quote