What is the difference between an unsound argument and an invalid argument? Give an example of each please?

Question

Also When you are building an argument for an issue that is significant to you, do you think it is more important to be sound or valid? Explain you answer.

Answer 1

An unsound argument has some basis in fact and may not be completely wrong. An invalid argument is because the points made simply do not apply to the argument.



Unsound: It rained today because it was cloudy. Actually, the fact that it was cloudy was a side effect of the cause of the rain. It does indeed get cloudy before it rains, but that is not the exact cause of the rain.



Invalid: It rained today because apples are red. The colors of apples have no bearing on the weather.

Answer 2

Soundness A Sound argument is a valid argument in which all its premises are true. (Passes both the validity and the truth tests). An unsound argument is an argument which is either invalid or is valid but has at least one false premise. (It fails either the validity test or the truth test). Example Every person is a joker John Smith is a person John Smith is a joker Invalidity The one thing a valid argument cannot have is true premises and a false conclusion. An invalid argument is an argument in which it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. Example If I work, then I can pay my bills I can pay my bills, Therefore, I must have worked The argument is invalid. Consider the possibility that I just won the lottery.

Answer 3

An unsound arguement may be true but lack a concrete reference. For example I may say George Washington was elected first President of the United States by 5210 votes but without a documented reference the arguement is unsound.

If I say Peter Piper was the first President of the United States that arguement is invalid because it cannot possibly be true. I hope you do well in logic it was my favorite college course! Good Luck