Common argument forms and fallacies – UGC NET Question

Statements A and B correctly identify modus ponens and modus tollens as valid argument forms, and D correctly states that denying the antecedent is invalid even though it superficially resembles a valid pattern. Statement E is also true because exam questions often depend on distinguishing valid inferences from fallacies. Statement C is false since affirming the consequent is a classic fallacy; from “if p then q” and “q” one cannot conclude “p” with certainty. Therefore, the combination A, B, D and E only is correct.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E and therefore does not highlight the practical importance of recognising these forms when evaluating arguments in tests like UGC NET. Without E, the applied dimension of the topic is not fully expressed.

Option B:
Option B is also incomplete as it leaves out A, failing to mention explicitly the widely used valid pattern of modus ponens, which is central to many logical derivations. This omission weakens the conceptual coverage.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it includes C, which treats affirming the consequent as valid, and thereby endorses a logical fallacy. Even though A, B and D are true, the presence of C invalidates the combination.

Option D:
Option D is correct as it gathers the two standard valid forms, identifies denying the antecedent as invalid and notes the value of recognising these patterns in reasoning tasks, while excluding C, the misclassification of affirming the consequent. It matches the logic syllabus for UGC NET.