Final answer:
Inductive arguments cannot be valid or sound, as these terms are specific to deductive reasoning. Inductive arguments are instead evaluated based on whether they are strong and cogent, the latter requiring true premises.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question is whether an inductive argument can be valid without being sound. By definition, validity pertains to deductive arguments and their structure, meaning if the premises are true, the conclusion is necessarily true. However, inductive arguments are built on probability, not certainty. Therefore, the notion of 'validity' in the strict formal sense does not apply to inductive arguments. Instead, inductive arguments are assessed in terms of strength (how probable the conclusion is, given the premises) and weakness (how improbable the conclusion is, given the premises).
Soundness, on the other hand, is a term that applies when both the structure of the argument is valid (in deductive terms) and when all the premises are true. Since inductive arguments do not engage in 'validity' in this formal sense, discussing inductive arguments in terms of soundness would be inappropriate. Instead, we talk about whether an inductive argument is cogent, which means it is strong and has all true premises.
Thus, the statement 'an inductive argument can be valid without being sound' is a category mistake because it misapplies the concept of validity and soundness to inductive reasoning. The correct statement would be 'an inductive argument can be strong without being cogent,' which is true if the premises are not all true.