Final answer:
Validity of an argument refers to its logical structure, such that if the premises are true, the conclusion must follow. For Julia Serano's argument to be valid, it should follow a logically coherent structure without logical fallacies. To judge an argument as sound, one must also verify the truth of its premises in addition to its validity.
Step-by-step explanation:
When evaluating whether Julia Serano's argument is valid, it's important to consider the structure and form of the reasoning involved. A valid argument is one where, if the premises are true, the conclusion must necessarily be true. We must assess if the argument follows a logical form that guarantees this validity, such as a disjunctive syllogism, without considering the actual truth of the premises or the conclusion.
Considering validity doesn't mean accepting that the conclusion is true in reality; it only means that the process of deductive reasoning is structurally sound. Emotional responses and accusations, like a strawman or fallacies of diversion, should not cloud our judgement about the argument's validity. Loaded questions and begging the question are also signs of a problematic argument, as they insert assumptions that have not been critically examined or proven.
To accept Serano's argument as sound, not only does it have to be valid, but we also need to examine the truth of the premises. Without knowing the specifics of Serano's argument, judging its soundness would require an analysis of whether the premises are in fact true, in addition to being logically structured.