UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

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 sound argument satisfies two conditions: it is deductively valid and all of its premises are in fact true. When these conditions hold, the conclusion must not only follow logically but must also be true. Soundness thus combines the formal virtue of validity with the material virtue of factual correctness. Therefore the argument described in the stem is properly called sound.

Option A:
Option A, strong, is used to evaluate inductive arguments where premises make the conclusion highly probable, not deductively certain. It does not by itself guarantee truth or validity in the deductive sense.

Option B:
Option B is correct because soundness is the recognised standard for high-quality deductive arguments whose conclusions we can safely accept as true. The stem explicitly mentions both validity and true premises, which are the defining features of a sound argument.

Option C:
Option C, cogent, is the analogous term for inductive arguments that are strong and have true premises, leading to a probably true conclusion. It does not apply to deductive arguments characterised by necessity.

Option D:
Option D, circular, denotes a pattern of reasoning in which the conclusion is effectively assumed in the premises. Such arguments are logically flawed even if the premises and conclusion are all true and so cannot serve as the ideal described in the question.

Statements A, B, C and E correctly describe validity and soundness, while D is clearly false. Validity concerns the relationship between premises and conclusion such that true premises cannot yield a false conclusion, and soundness adds the factual truth of premises. A valid argument may still have false premises, so C is also correct. Sound arguments must have true conclusions, not false ones, hence D is rejected, and all the true statements together are captured by option B.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits E, ignoring the explicit relevance of distinguishing validity and truth in UGC NET reasoning questions. Although A, B and C are true, leaving out E means the set is incomplete. This combination does not fully answer the question as stated.

Option B:
Option B is correct since it includes exactly the true statements A, B, C and E and excludes D, which wrongly claims that sound arguments must end in false conclusions. This option therefore matches standard textbook definitions and exam practice. It recognises that soundness guarantees a true conclusion, the opposite of what D asserts.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it leaves out A, the central definition of validity, and thus fails to include all the correct statements. Even though B, C and E are true, missing A makes the combination partially accurate only. Hence it cannot be the right answer.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it omits B, the definition of soundness, which is essential in this context, and still includes only part of the true set. A, C, E only therefore fails to capture the complete group of correct statements required by the question.

Statements A, C and E are correct, while B and D are false. A cogent argument is by definition a strong inductive argument with true premises, so B mislabels weak arguments as cogent merely because their conclusion happens to be true. Soundness is defined for deductive arguments, not inductive ones, so D is also incorrect. A valid argument with false premises can be unsound, which C correctly notes, and UGC NET reasoning requires keeping these concepts distinct, which E expresses. Hence A, C, E only form the correct set.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E, ignoring the exam-specific requirement that candidates differentiate these notions. A, C only therefore does not fully address the focus of the question.

Option B:
Option B is correct as it gathers the true definitional and exam-related statements while excluding B and D, which distort the ideas of cogency and soundness. This matches how standard logic texts and UGC NET materials treat the concepts.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it adds B to the otherwise correct set, thereby endorsing the possibility of a weak argument being cogent merely on the basis of a true conclusion. A, B, C, E only thus includes a false statement.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect since it includes D, which misdefines soundness, and omits A, which correctly characterises cogent inductive arguments. C, D, E only fails to capture all correct statements and mixes in an error.