An argument that is not deductively valid is always weak.

### Why this is right The statement is false because inductive arguments can be strong even though they do not guarantee their conclusions. Inductive strength concerns probability, while deductive validity concerns certainty given true premises. ### The concept A strong inductive argument gives credible evidence that makes its conclusion likely. The representative survey example supports the prediction that a student who completed weekly quizzes will probably pass, but it cannot rule out failure. That argument is not deductively valid, yet it can still be strong. “Invalid” in the deductive sense does not automatically mean “poorly supported” when the argument is inductive. ### The other options - **True**: would incorrectly treat deductive validity as the only kind of good support. It overlooks strong probability-based reasoning. ### Terms - **Deductive validity**: A guarantee that true premises cannot accompany a false conclusion. - **Inductive strength**: How strongly evidence makes a conclusion probable. - **Weak argument**: An argument whose premises do not provide enough support for its conclusion. ### Remember An argument can lack certainty and still offer strong evidence.