The argument is Non-deductive and strong.

This is because the argument is based on inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning (non-deductive) involves making broad generalizations from specific observations. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false. Here's why:

In this case, the observation is that "the sun has been rising for as long as humankind can remember. The sun rose today as well." The broad generalization (or conclusion) then is that "the sun is likely to rise tomorrow."

However, while this conclusion is likely based on the evidence, it's not 100% certain. There could be some unforeseen event (like a massive astronomical event) that could prevent the sun from rising. Because of this small level of uncertainty, the argument is strong (because it's likely to be true based on consistent observational evidence), but it's non-deductive (because the conclusion isn't guaranteed).

Question

The argument is Non-deductive and strong.

This is because the argument is based on inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning (non-deductive) involves making broad generalizations from specific observations. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false. Here's why:

In this case, the observation is that "the sun has been rising for as long as humankind can remember. The sun rose today as well." The broad generalization (or conclusion) then is that "the sun is likely to rise tomorrow."

However, while this conclusion is likely based on the evidence, it's not 100% certain. There could be some unforeseen event (like a massive astronomical event) that could prevent the sun from rising. Because of this small level of uncertainty, the argument is strong (because it's likely to be true based on consistent observational evidence), but it's non-deductive (because the conclusion isn't guaranteed).

Knowee AI · Accepted Answer

The argument is Non-deductive and strong.

This is because the argument is based on inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning (non-deductive) involves making broad generalizations from specific observations. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false. Here's why:

In this case, the observation is that "the sun has been rising for as long as humankind can remember. The sun rose today as well." The broad generalization (or conclusion) then is that "the sun is likely to rise tomorrow."

However, while this conclusion is likely based on the evidence, it's not 100% certain. There could be some unforeseen event (like a massive astronomical event) that could prevent the sun from rising. Because of this small level of uncertainty, the argument is strong (because it's likely to be true based on consistent observational evidence), but it's non-deductive (because the conclusion isn't guaranteed).

The sun has been rising for as long as humankind can remember. The sun rose today as well. Hence, the sun is likely to rise tomorrow.This argument is:Group of answer choicesNon-deductive and strongDeductive and validNon-deductive and weakDeductive and invalid

Question

Solution

Similar Questions

Upgrade your grade with Knowee