"I<Clicker 2 is a useful tool in educational settings. Many universities have begun using I<Clicker 2 to capture student response information in the classroom, and 94% of users agree that the product is effective or extremely effective. If you are looking for an exciting way to increase interaction in the classroom, then I<Clicker2 is the product for you.” (D)
• Is the argument Inductive? Deductive? Concatenated?
I think its deductive but not sure?
can it be concatented?
• Reasoning for argument type.
Can it be hypothetical syllogism ?
• Reference to the argument as
support. ?
To determine whether the argument is inductive or deductive, we need to examine the structure of the argument and the nature of the premises and conclusion.
In this case, the argument is presented as a persuasive statement rather than a logical proof. It states that I<Clicker 2 is a useful tool in educational settings and provides some evidence such as its usage in universities and a high approval rating of 94%. However, it does not provide any logical or causal reasoning to support the conclusion that I<Clicker 2 is the product for increasing interaction in the classroom.
Therefore, this argument is more likely to be classified as an inductive argument rather than a deductive argument. Inductive arguments involve generalizing from specific instances or observations to a broader conclusion, without providing certainty. In this case, the argument is based on the experiences of "many universities" and the agreement of 94% of users.
Regarding the possibility of the argument being concatenated, concatenated arguments involve multiple premises leading to a conclusion. In this case, the argument does not include any additional premises or explicit connections between statements, so it does not appear to be concatenated.
As for the hypothetical syllogism, it refers to a specific form of deductive reasoning where two conditional statements are combined to form a conclusion. Since the argument in question is more likely to be inductive, it does not fit the structure of a hypothetical syllogism.
In summary, the argument can be classified as an inductive argument, as it relies on specific instances and observations to generalize a broader conclusion. It is not a concatenated argument, as it does not include additional premises or explicit connections. Lastly, it does not fit the structure of a hypothetical syllogism, as it is not deductive in nature.