Question

Consider the following argument: Here in Boulder, the sun has risen every morning. The sun is going to rise in Boulder tomorrow. Is the argument strong or weak?

1) the argument is weak, because there is only one specific case
2) the argument is strong, because the premise includes scientific evidence
3) the argument is weak, because the observation does not consider other cities
4) the observation is strong, because there are a large number of observations

Answer 1

The argument based on the observation that the sun has consistently risen in Boulder is a strong inductive inference supported by scientific understanding of the earth's rotation, but certainty of the sun rising tomorrow is never absolute.

Step-by-step explanation:

The argument suggesting that the sun will rise tomorrow in Boulder because it has risen every morning is an example of inductive reasoning. While the argument is based on numerous observations of the sun rising, it is strengthened by our scientific understanding of the earth's rotation on its axis. This ongoing pattern provides a strong inductive inference that the sun will rise again tomorrow, assuming that no massive, unforeseen cosmic event disrupts this pattern. However, this certainty is never absolute, as there is always an extremely slim chance of an unexpected event, thus making the proposition only probable, but very nearly certain.