Indeed, the probability of having a true conclusion is also very low and hence the uncogency. Argument 2 The premise of this argument is that Hamilton is in New York State if he is in the United States. Consequently, the conclusion of the argument is that Hamilton is not in New York State since he is not in U.S. This is a deductive, cogent argument. We can derive that the argument is deductive because the premises succeed in supporting and guaranteeing the truth of the conclusion (Bassham et al, 2011). Indeed, since the premises are true, the conclusion is also true. This generates a valid argument. The argument is also cogent since the premises are true and the conclusion has a high probability of being true. Ideally, since the argument is valid and the conclusion is true, then it is a sound argument. Argument 3 The premise of this argument is that Ontario must be in Canada if he is in North America. Consequently, the conclusion of the argument is that Ontario is in Canada since he is in North America. This is a deductive, cogent argument. In this case, the premises succeed in providing strong support for the conclusion thus guaranteeing its truthfulness. Indeed, since the premises are true, the conclusion is also true, and the argument is thus valid. ...

Notably, this is an inductive, uncogent argument. Indeed, although some statements are true, the premise is false, and the conclusion is likely to be false. We can establish that the argument is inductive since it depicts a statistical argument, leads to a false conclusion, and its conclusion has an induction indicator word ‘probably.’ Furthermore, the argument is uncogent since it is weak and has at least one false premise. Argument 5 The premise of this argument is that feminism is nonsense because my bartender said so. Consequently, the conclusion of the argument is that feminism is indeed nonsense since my bartender never lies. Notably, this is an inductive, uncogent argument. Assuredly, the conclusion lacks logic and is indeed false since feminism carries a lot of sense. We can establish that the argument is inductive since it depicts a statistical argument and leads to a false conclusion. Indeed, the conclusion does not follow logically from the statements and the bartender has no capacity to discredit feminism. Furthermore, the argument is uncogent since it is weak and has at least one false premise. Indeed, the probability of having a true conclusion is also very low and hence the uncogency. Argument 6 The premise of this argument is that all poker players are card players and some card players are gamblers. Consequently, the conclusion is that all poker players are gamblers. Notably, this is an inductive, cogent argument. Assuredly, the conclusion lacks logic and is indeed false even though the premises are true. We can establish that the argument is inductive since it depicts a statistical argument and leads to a false conclusion. Furthermore, the argument is cogent since it is
...Show more