Question

The principle above, if established, would justify which one of the following judgments?

a) The evidence is irrelevant to the argument.

b) The main argument is well-supported.

c) There is no clear point of contention.

d) The argument lacks coherence.

Answer 1

The principle indicates an argument where true premises do not support the true conclusion, pointing to a lack of clear inference, which means the argument lacks coherence.

Step-by-step explanation:

The principle being discussed pertains to certain flaws in argumentation. In this scenario, an argument is deemed illogical if its premises, while true, do not support its conclusion. The premises and conclusion may be unrelated, lacking a clear inference or reasoning pathway that logically connects them. Therefore, faced with the choice to justify a judgment based on these flaws, the most suitable option is that the argument lacks coherence due to inadequate premises that do not justifiably lead to the conclusion.