Definition of valid argument – UGC NET Question

A valid argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. This captures the idea that the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. Validity concerns the logical form of the argument, not the actual truth of its statements. Therefore the argument described in the stem is correctly called valid.

Option A:
Option A names valid argument, which is defined by necessary truth preservation from premises to conclusion. It exactly fits the description that the conclusion must follow from the premises. Hence this option is the correct label.

Option B:
Option B, sound, additionally requires that a valid argument have all true premises. Soundness is a stronger property than validity. Since the stem mentions only necessary following, not truth of premises, sound is not the best match.

Option C:
Option C, weak, usually describes an inductive argument in which the premises provide little support for the conclusion. Weak arguments do not ensure or strongly suggest the truth of the conclusion. Thus weak is opposite to the idea expressed in the question.

Option D:
Option D, persuasive, indicates that an argument is psychologically convincing, which may occur even if it is logically bad. Persuasion depends on audience factors rather than strict logical consequence. Therefore persuasive is not the technical term required here.