Table of Contents
Premise 1: Some domestic chores such as cooking, housecleaning and house maintenance are done by homemakers.
Premise 2: All women are homemakers.
Conclusion: Therefore, women are responsible for domestic chores.
The argument is invalid. Although both premises are true, they do not provide any reasons to make such a conclusion. The argument is invalid since valid argument would not use quantifiers such as some and all.
Premise 1: There are advantages associated with homemakers returning to work.
Premise 2: Homemakers want to return to work.
Conclusion: Therefore, homemakers should return to work.
This is a valid argument. Both premises support the argument and comply with the conclusion. Premises are true, and anyone who supports them will most likely agree with the conclusion.
Premise 1: A paper that addresses all required questions should get an A grade.
Premise 2: My paper addressed all the questions that were required.
Conclusion: It follows that my paper should get an A grade.
This is a deductive informal fallacy. It is not necessarily true that one should get a grade A even if his/her paper addresses all the questions. There are some other fundamental factors that might affect the grade. For instance, the paper may address all questions but fail to get everything right. Consequently, there must be more true premises for the conclusion to be true.
Premise 1: If the paper clearly identifies and explains the position in regard to the chosen topic, it may earn 2.5 points.
Premise 2: The paper clearly elaborated on the position about chosen topic.
Conclusion: I may infer that I deserve 2.5 points.
This is a valid argument. Such arguments are called modus ponens. These kinds of arguments use conditional statements, such as if and then, to arrive at the conclusion. In such cases, true premises make the conclusion to be true.
Premise 1: Providing a well written paper addressing all target population deserves a point.
Premise 2: The paper was well written and addressed all the needed population.
Conclusion: whence, I deserve a point
This is a valid argument. A well written paper deserves a point and the paper provided is well written. Consequently, the paper deserves a point.
In order to avoid fallacies and invalid argumentation, one should consider changing the way of reasoning. Avoiding common logical mistakes will help one avoid making invalid arguments (Tindale, 2007).
Related Review essays