There is a big difference between a strong argument and a valid argument. Strong argument is an statement that is very believable but is not proven with undeniable facts. For example, "Smoking cigarettes causes an increased risk of lung cancer." This argument has been proven to be correct through various research studies and tests. It is almost impossible to prove otherwise. This is a valid example of a valid argument.
A strong argument is a statement that is hard to prove wrong, but it can be done. An example of this would be : "The New York Yankees won the World Series because of all the good player bought out by the Yankees franchise" This would be considered strong evidence because the New York Yankees did win the 2009 World Series, but it can not be proven the World Series were solely won by the players. Its counterargument would be that the championship was won by the coaches and staff, not the players.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I found your examples for both valid arguments and strong arguments very different. I liked how you used the smoking one because it did have strong evidence and yet people still think it to be false. As for the baseball one, I found it interesting that you said there could be a counterargument that the championship was won by not the players but the staff and coaches. It puts a different twist on the idea of a strong argument and I thought it was interesting how you did that.
ReplyDelete