Question

1. Consider the following argument:

If Greg is a philosopher, then Greg is a horse.

Greg is a philosopher.

Therefore, Greg is a horse.

This argument is

1. valid but not sound.
2. sound but not valid.
3. neither valid nor sound.

1. Mark is sitting on a jury. The evidence presented against the defendant has been slim and only circumstantial. It's not even clear that any crime has been committed. Once the jury retires to discuss the case, Mark is slow to express his view that the defendant has not been proven guilty, because he's sure that everyone else will feel the same way. Mark is probably falling prey to
2. the false consensus effect.
3. heuristic considerations.
4. Sjoegren's Syndrome

1. "All the evidence we've acquired points to the theory that life forms are constantly evolving. We ought therefore to expect the human race to continue evolving in the future."

This argument is

1. false.
2. inductive.
3. fallacious.

Answer 1

Solution:

1: Valid but not sound
The argument is valid but is not a sound argument. Premises are not true in these arguments.

2: False consensus effect
Mark is falling prey to false consensus effect where he thinks that the social opinion would be the same as that of himself because of the case proceedings.

3: Inductive
The argument is inductive.