Analyzing Arguments All college students take Critical Thinking. Therefore, Henry studiesTherefore, John is a college student.
Did you leave out some words?
Therefore, Henry studies _____?
And where does John come into this?
Please clarify, and we'll try to help you.
It should say if henry studies than... and john takes critical thinking therefore john is a college student.
The argument you provided is not logically valid. Let's analyze it step by step to understand why.
1. Premise: All college students take Critical Thinking.
2. Conclusion: Therefore, Henry studies Critical Thinking.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, John is a college student.
The first conclusion is fine, as it follows directly from the premise. However, the second conclusion does not logically follow from the previous statements. Just because Henry studies Critical Thinking does not necessarily mean that John is a college student. This argument contains a logical fallacy called affirming the consequent.
To explain further, affirming the consequent is a type of fallacy where we mistakenly believe that if a statement is true, then its consequent (or outcome) must be true as well. In this case, the premise states that all college students take Critical Thinking. Assuming that John studies Critical Thinking (the consequent), the argument jumps to the conclusion that John must be a college student. However, this is an incorrect deduction because there could be other possible explanations for John's enrollment in a Critical Thinking course (e.g., he is taking it as an elective or attending the class as a non-college student).
To construct a logically valid argument, we need evidence or information specific to John's situation to prove that he is indeed a college student.