Question

Consider the following argument:

Premise 1: Steven played a video game with heavy gun use.
Premise 2: Simulating shooting guns at people is wrong.
Conclusion: Therefore, Steven should not be playing the video game.
The statement, "Steven should not be playing the video game," is an example of which of the following?

A. Deductive reasoning
B. Inductive reasoning
C. Valid argument
D. None of the above

Answer 1

The statement is an example of a conclusion reached through deductive reasoning and represents a valid argument, assuming both premises are true.

Step-by-step explanation:

The statement, "Steven should not be playing the video game," is an example of a deductive reasoning conclusion. Deductive reasoning is a process where the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. If Premise 1 and Premise 2 of the argument are both true, then the conclusion that "Steven should not be playing the video game" logically follows. Therefore, the argument outlined is an example of a valid argument, provided that the premise that "simulating shooting guns at people is wrong" is accepted as true.