question 2 determine if the conclusion follows logically from the premises. i always eat hamburgers in the…

question 2 determine if the conclusion follows logically from the premises. i always eat hamburgers in the morning. it is morning. therefore, i will have a hamburger. valid argument invalid argument no song written by paul mccartney is a hit song. this song was written by paul mccartney. therefore, this song is not a hit song. valid argument invalid argument question help: message instructor post to forum

question 2 determine if the conclusion follows logically from the premises. i always eat hamburgers in the morning. it is morning. therefore, i will have a hamburger. valid argument invalid argument no song written by paul mccartney is a hit song. this song was written by paul mccartney. therefore, this song is not a hit song. valid argument invalid argument question help: message instructor post to forum

Answer

Brief Explanations:

  1. For the first argument, the first premise states a general rule (always eat hamburgers in the morning) and the second premise affirms the antecedent (it is morning), so the conclusion (will have a hamburger) follows by modus ponens.
  2. For the second argument, the first premise sets a universal negative (no McCartney - written song is a hit), and the second premise identifies a song as McCartney - written. So, by universal instantiation, the conclusion (this song is not a hit) is valid.

Answer:

  1. A. Valid argument
  2. A. Valid argument