Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

"The relation that exists between Premises and conclusion is that of logical necessity" - is the case with which of the following arguments?

"The relation that exists between Premises and conclusion is that of logical necessity" - is the case with which of the following arguments? Correct Answer Deductive

An argument is any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others, which are regarded as providing support or grounds for the truth of that one. The conclusion of an argument is the proposition that is affirmed based on the other propositions. Those other propositions are the premises. The kinds of arguments are:

Deductive Argument:

  • It is based on logic i.e. reasoning out to get a valid inference. If there is a general reality, it is considered to hold valid for the specific situation too.
  • A deductive argument claims that its conclusion is supported by its premises conclusively.
  • A deductive argument is valid when, if its premises are true, its conclusion must be true.
  • For example, consider the two statements: All dogs have four legs (general statement) and Naren has a dog (Specific). From this, one can conclude that Naren’s dog also has four legs. The two arguments presented are called premises, and one draws a conclusion assuming the premises are true.         
  • Generic  Premises ⇒ Specific Conclusion through logic ⇒ Deductive Argument

Inductive Argument:

  • Here, no claim of conclusiveness is made. It uses a set of specific observations to reach an overarching conclusion. An inductive argument’s success is a matter of degree, unlike deductive arguments. For example, consider the two statements: Most dogs have four legs and Naren has a dog, and conclude that Naren’s dog has four legs, then it is inductive arguments.
  • Many Specific Occurrences ⇒ Generic/Specific Conclusion ⇒ Inductive Argument

Analogical Argument:

  • Analogical arguments rely on analogies. So, when we make use of analogical arguments, it is important to make clear in what ways are two things supposed to be similar. Analogies are again comparisons and the conclusion is based on inductive reasoning (prevalence).
  • Analogical arguments ⇒ Inductive Argument through comparison 

Demonstrative Argument:

  • Here, arguments mean some conclusion is proved, so it is not logical but proof that supports the conclusion. Again, it is inductive arguments that is used to conclude demonstrative arguments.
  • Demonstrative arguments ⇒ Inductive Argument through proof/demonstration

Hence, it is clear from the above points that "The relation that exists between Premises and conclusion is that of logical necessity" - is the case with deductive arguments.

Related Questions

Consider the following statements.
1. All valid arguments contain only true premises and a true conclusion.
2. Some valid arguments contain only false propositions - false premises and a true conclusion.
3. All valid arguments contain only false propositions all premises are false, conclusion is false as well.
Which of the above statements is correct?
Given below are two statements : Statement I:  The evaluation of an argument involves two steps namely evaluating the link between premises and conclusion and evaluating the truth of the premises. Statement II: Deductive arguments in which the conclusion actually follows from the premises are said to be valid, and those that also have true premises are said to be sound. In the light of the above statements, choose the correct answer from the options given below :
Which of the following statements correctly apply to deductive arguments? A. Deductive arguments are either valid or invalid B. There must be a necessary relation between the premises and the conclusion C. Adding new premises improves the validity D. False premises may lead to a true conclusion Choose the correct answer from the options given below :
Which of the following statements correctly apply to inductive arguments? A. They are neither conclusively valid nor invalid. B. Adding new premises makes no difference to the argument. C. Adding new premises may strengthen/weaken the argument. D. Conclusion follows from premises with absolute necessity. Choose the correct answer from the options given below:
In which of the following arguments ‘the relation that exists between premises and conclusion is that of logical necessity’?
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should fight for Cauvery river stop between the states? Arguments: I. Yes, because instead of fighting over it, the river should be saved and actions should be taken in cleaning up. II. No, because this fight is benefiting the political parties in many ways.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: A shortage of bank branches and ATMs across India’s hinterland is holding back Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s financial inclusion efforts and risks angering rural voters ahead of elections next year. After taking office in 2014, Modi set an ambitious target to open a bank account for every household to ensure welfare funds flow directly to India’s poor, while improving access to credit and insurance programs. He pushed policies that helped bring 310 million people into the formal banking system in just four years, according to the World Bank. Based on the arguments stated below and he information stated above, which of the following arguments state the reason for the problem, ‘But many of India’s villages still lack bank branches or ATMs to help service new customers, while the pace of building new financial infrastructure has actually slowed’.  Arguments: I. Because Modi’s government effectively forced poor citizens into the banking system by linking some welfare benefits to bank accounts, villagers have ended up stuck in long queues and struggling with ATMs that often run out of cash or break down.  II. With an election due next year, the mismatch between the government’s policies and the rural banking system is generating frustration among a key slice of India’s electorate. III. The banking system struggled to keep up, while some gains proved temporary. Nearly half of Indian bank accounts were inactive in 2017, meaning they weren’t used at all in the previous 12 months
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should a limit be set on expenditure people can make on weddings? Arguments: I. Yes. Marriages are waste of money and time. II. No. Marriage is an individual’s personal affair and they should be allowed to spend how much they want to.  
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should government provide methods to mechanise the agricultural operations? Arguments: I. Yes, by doing that wastage of labour force is avoided and farming is made convenient and efficient. II. No, work can be carried out by human hand using simple tools.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should use of artificial fertilisers be banned? Arguments: I. Yes. Over-use of fertilisers make land barren overtime and pollute water bodies. II. No. They give better results than natural fertilisers and improve growth.