UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A and B capture that validity is about form, not actual truth of premises. Statement C correctly defines the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Statement E is true because many reasoning questions test the distinction between validity and soundness. Statement D is false since a sound argument is valid and has true premises. Hence A, B, C and E only are correct.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E (importance of the distinction) even though A, B, C are true.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it omits B (valid with false premises) and also does not include all correct statements together.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it gathers all true statements and excludes D, which reverses the condition for soundness.

Option D:
Option D is wrong because it includes D (false), even though it contains some true statements.

A sound argument is defined as a valid argument with all true premises. Because of validity, the conclusion logically follows from the premises. Because the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true in reality. Thus the description in the stem corresponds exactly to the notion of a sound argument.

Option A:
Option A, strong, usually refers to inductive arguments in which the premises make the conclusion highly probable. Strength does not guarantee truth with necessity and need not involve validity. Therefore strong is not the correct technical term here.

Option B:
Option B correctly names a sound argument as one that is valid with true premises. Such arguments provide the highest level of logical assurance about their conclusions. Hence sound is the most appropriate choice for the situation described.

Option C:
Option C, cogent, also describes a good inductive argument with strong support and true premises. However, cogency belongs to inductive, not strictly valid deductive, reasoning. Thus cogent does not match the definition given in the stem.

Option D:
Option D, invalid, refers to an argument whose conclusion does not follow necessarily from its premises. In an invalid argument, true premises may still lead to a false conclusion. Therefore invalid is the opposite of what is described and cannot be correct.

A valid argument is one where, if the premises were true, the conclusion would necessarily be true. Soundness, however, requires both validity and the actual truth of all premises. If a premise is false, the argument cannot be sound, even if its logical form is flawless. Thus, the correct classification is that the argument is valid in structure but unsound due to at least one false premise.

Option A:
Option A incorrectly assumes that validity alone ensures soundness, ignoring the need for true premises.

Option B:
Option B clearly separates the structural property of validity from the factual requirement of true premises, matching the standard definitions in logic.

Option C:
Option C is impossible, because soundness implies validity; an invalid argument cannot be sound.

Option D:
Option D is too strong, denying validity when only the premises are at fault, which misclassifies the argument’s logical form.

The argument’s form is: All A are B; All B are C; Therefore, All A are C. This is a standard valid syllogistic pattern; if the premises were true, the conclusion would necessarily follow. However, in reality the premises “All squares are circles” and “All circles are triangles” are false. Because at least one premise is false, the argument is not sound, even though its logical form is valid. Therefore, it is valid but unsound.

Option A:
Option A would require both validity and the truth of premises, which is not satisfied here because the premises distort geometric facts.

Option B:
Option B separates form and content, recognising that the inference pattern is correct while the factual premises render the argument unsound.

Option C:
Option C is impossible, because soundness presupposes validity; an invalid argument cannot be sound.

Option D:
Option D wrongly denies the validity of the form simply because the premises are false, confusing logical structure with factual accuracy.

Statements A, B, C and D correctly distinguish truth from validity and define soundness. E is false because a true conclusion can result from invalid reasoning. Therefore A, B, C and D are the correct statements.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits D, the definition of soundness (validity + true premises).

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it includes E, which is false, and it also omits D, which is true.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it omits A, which is true (validity does not require true premises).

Option D:
Option D is correct as it gathers all four true statements (A, B, C, D) and omits E.