Question

I'm a bit confused by the criticism here.

That is, this argument has no problems with logical sequence and if the premises are correct, then the conclusion will also be correct? Why do many experts consider it unsuitable?

The principle of uniformity of nature and preservation of symmetry is also an argument. by analogy or are these inductive arguments?

Answer 1

An argument with a logical sequence and true premises will lead to a true conclusion. However, experts may find flaws in the premises or logical structure of the argument. The principle of uniformity of nature and preservation of symmetry are examples of inductive arguments.

Step-by-step explanation:

In philosophy, arguments are evaluated based on logical reasoning and the truth of their premises. If an argument has a logical sequence and the premises are true, then the conclusion will also be true. However, when experts consider an argument unsuitable, it is usually because they find flaws in the premises or the logical structure of the argument.

The principle of uniformity of nature and preservation of symmetry can be considered as inductive arguments. Inductive arguments rely on evidence and observations to form a probable conclusion. Analogical arguments also fall under inductive reasoning, as they make conclusions based on similarities between different situations or objects.