Philosophy

Question 1
Not all persuasive arguments are valid, as argumentation is different from persuasion.
Persuasion entails influencing a person, and this can be through coercion, deception, or even
threats. A good argument, however, presents valid reasons in support of a certain assertion. I
once persuaded my friends to go and vote. I used arguments that were valid to convince them
that voting is a civil right and is necessary for every legible voter.
Question 2
A valid deductive argument can have false premises. Form as opposed to content is
considered while evaluating the validity of such an argument. Further, validity and truthfulness
of an argument are very different. Thus, depending on the structure of the argument, it can have
false premises.
Question 3
The premises are always true. A strong argument is said to be cogent if its premises are
true. Thus, if they were not true, it would not be cogent in the first place. However, the
conclusion is not always true. While the premises hold as true all the time, they provide probable
but not decisive support.
Question 4
A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. It is deductive in nature and
tries to offer decisive justification for the conclusion. On the other hand, a strong argument with

3
true premises is a cogent argument. The true premises support the conclusion in what would be
referred to as a probable way.
Question 5
The argument is valid. It is a modus ponens where the first premise is conditional. The
condition in the premise is affirmed by the second premise, and this means that the conclusion
has to be true. It affirms the antecedent.
Question 6
The argument form is valid. It is a hypothetical syllogism, and this means that the
premises are true and so is the conclusion. It is a deductive argument that comprises of three
declarations. Besides, it affirms the antecedent and is thus a hypothetical syllogism.
Question 7
A counterexample method is an approach used to test the validity of an argument based
on an essential information that is already known and considered true. For example, it is already
known that an invalid argument has true premises and conclusion that is false. So one can test the
validity of any argument based on this fact. If you already have an argument whose validity you
cannot ascertain, then you can invent a new argument with a similar form as the one you are
trying to examine. An argument is invalid if its premises are true but the conclusion is false.
Question 8
A moral argument must contain a moral statement in at least one of its premises and it
should affirm a general moral standard. It also must have a statement that is nonmoral in at least
one premises.
Question 9

4
Moral premises are evaluated based on logic. The best method entails looking at the
premise and its supporting statement. A moral premise must be supported by statements that
justify it.
Question 10
The method for locating implied premises is to treat them as deductive. This way, one is
able to identify the implied premise and to evaluate the worthiness of the premises. Some
arguments will have implied premises, and when one treats them as deductive, then it is possible
to locate these premises.