Match each reasoning category with the description that best defines it.

### The pairs | Item | Matches | Why | |---|---|---| | Strong inductive argument | Credible evidence makes the conclusion likely, not certain. | Inductive support raises the probability of a conclusion but does not guarantee it. | | Weak inductive argument | The premises do not give enough support for the conclusion. | The evidence is too limited, irrelevant, or otherwise inadequate for the claim. | | Fallacy | Faulty reasoning, rather than simply a false statement. | A fallacy concerns how premises support a conclusion, not just whether a statement is false. | | Hasty generalization | A broad conclusion based on too few or unrepresentative examples. | The evidence does not adequately represent the group covered by the conclusion. | ### The concept Inductive reasoning has degrees of strength. A strong inference uses relevant and credible evidence, while a weak one leaves the conclusion poorly supported. Fallacies are reasoning errors, and hasty generalization is one example. An argument's statements may be true while the inference is still poor, because the evidence may not justify the scope of the conclusion. ### Terms - **Inductive argument**: An argument offering evidence for a probable conclusion. - **Fallacy**: An error in reasoning. - **Hasty generalization**: A general claim based on inadequate examples. ### Remember Inductive strength depends on how well the evidence supports the size and certainty of the conclusion.