Week 2 question 2

There is a big difference between strong arguments and valid
arguments. It is possible for an argument to be valid but not strong

In a valid argument, there is no way for the premise to be true and
the conclusion false. If “X” is met, then “Y” is true, and most valid
statements follow that outline. An example from my daily live occurred
the other day happened at a dog park. My friend claimed that “all dogs
like treats. Your golden retriever is a dog. Therefore, she likes
treats”. While the argument is valid, it lacks strength. Valid, yet
weak arguments tend to overlook all exceptions to the scenario,
assuming that the premise is the reason for the conclusion. My dog
could eat them for medical reasons, or simply dislike them but still
eat them just because they are there. By coming up with reason after
reason that the conclusion of any argument does not relate to the
premise, we prove the arguments weakness.


Strength adds to an argument. My previous argument was valid, but
lacked strength due to the multiple possibilities leading to the
conclusion other than the premise. An example of a strong example
from daily life would be from a grocery store trip I took. I have
tried almost all varieties of Ketchup. I have never had a type of
Ketchup I did not enjoy. Therefore, I like all kinds of ketchup. This
argument is not valid, but it is strong. The premise is true, and the
fact about trying “almost all” varieties of Ketchup helps strengthen
it, but it is not perfect. While my claim is almost positively true,
there still can be an exception. The fewer exceptions that can be
found, the stronger it is.