I'm having a tough time with these two questions. I think I have it, based on the indicator, but I'm not positive that the reason that I listed is correct.
Argument:
1) Anything is possible (you agree?)
Therefore, it must be possible that something is impossible.
This is a contradiction - NOT everything is possible BECAUSE anything is possible.
1) Where is the main idea in this argument scheme?
2) Where are the reasons?
-------
1) after therefore: It must be possible that something is impossible.
2)anything is possible ... ?
Thank you!
I think you're right.
Thank you, Reed!
For the first question regarding the main idea in the argument scheme, the main idea is typically found in the conclusion of the argument. In this case, the conclusion is "Therefore, it must be possible that something is impossible." So the main idea would be that something being impossible is a possibility.
For the second question regarding the reasons in the argument, reasons are typically found in the premises of the argument. In this case, there is only one premise provided, which is "Anything is possible (you agree?)" This premise serves as the reason supporting the conclusion that something being impossible is a possibility.
To summarize:
1) The main idea in this argument scheme is that something being impossible is a possibility.
2) The reason in this argument scheme is the premise "Anything is possible (you agree?)"