X agreed to sexual activity with Y.

Therefore, X has a contract with Y for sexual activity.

Pineau argues that this argument is invalid. Adding which of the following premises would make it a valid (not sound!) argument (select all that apply):

Question

X agreed to sexual activity with Y.

Therefore, X has a contract with Y for sexual activity.

Pineau argues that this argument is invalid. Adding which of the following premises would make it a valid (not sound!) argument (select all that apply):

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks which additional premises would render Pineau's argument valid (though not necessarily sound). We start by restating the core claim: 'X agreed to sexual activity with Y' implies 'X has a contract with Y for sexual activity.' The validity of this inference depends on how we connect agreements to contracts.

Option 1: 'All agreements are contracts.' If this premise were added, then from 'X agreed to sexual activity' (an agreement) we can legitimately infer 'X has a contract for sexual activity' (since every agreement qualifies as a contract). In logical terms, Agreement → Contract is true for all cases, so the argument would be formally valid under this addition. The potential issue is not validity but soundness: not every agreement is actually a contract in real-world law, but the question specifically asks about validity, so this premise would make the form valid.

Option 2: 'Agreeing to do an action is a sufficient condition for having a contract to do that action.' A sufficient condition means: if the action is agreed to, then a contract exists for that action. Under this premise, from 'X agreed to sexual activity' we are guaranteed a contract for that activity. Therefore, the inference 'X has a contract with Y for sexual activity' follows validly. Again, this changes the argument's form to be valid, though not necessarily sound in real-world terms, since the premise asserts a general rule about contracts.

In sum, both options provide premises that would convert the argument into a valid form by establishing a direct logical link between agreement and contract. Neither option is about the truth of the real-world relationship beyond the logical structure required for validity; they simply supply rules that guarantee the conclusion follows from the premise.

The remaining possibilities would involve rejecting any general link between agreements and contracts or between agreement and contractual existence, which would fail to produce a valid form. Since only the two given premises are under consideration, each one independently can yield a valid argument if adopted as a premise.

PHI 007Y 001 SS1 2025 Week 5 Quiz

X agreed to sexual activity with Y. Therefore, X has a contract with Y for sexual activity. Pineau argues that this argument is invalid. Adding which of the following premises would make it a valid (not sound!) argument (select all that apply):

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

P1. Pornography can cause harm. C. We should ban pornography. Which premises can we add (individually) that would make the argument valid:

Is the following argument valid or invalid?P1. Start-ups with young founders always succeed.P2. Ms. Lee is the founder of a start-up.P3. Ms. Lee is young.Therefore,C. Ms. Lee's start-up will succeed.

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单