If so, then, strictly speaking, the argument is not deductively valid: we might have other reasons to think that the person's company will not fold. In that case PI would be true but C false. To make the argument valid, then, we would need the further premise that there is insufficient evidence that this person's new internet company would be significantly less likely than others to fold or be taken over. Alternatively, one could change the conclusion's consequent to 'unless there is other evidence to suppose otherwise, your company will fold or be taken over within three years'.

0 0

Post a comment