Was the argument put forth by the plaintiffs valid? check all of the correct boxes. the premises are not true all of the time. the premises are likely to be true. the premises reinforce, or support, the conclusion. the conclusion follows logically from the premises. the conclusion comes from a different premise.

B). The premises are likely to be true.

C).  The premises reinforce, or support, the conclusion.

D). The conclusion follows logically from the premises.

Explanation:

A valid argument is described as the argument in which the premises reasonably functions to ensure the truth and efficacy of the conclusion.

The valid arguments put forth by Plaintiffs would include options B, C, and D. 'The premises are likely to be true' because it contains chances of being false as well(in inductive reasoning). 'The premises reinforce, or support, the conclusion' as the premises are directly in proportion with the conclusion and if the premises support the conclusion, then it is considered true or vice versa. 'The conclusion follows logically from the premises' as the conclusion follows the premises. Thus, options B, C, and D are the correct answers.

a conclusion based on evidence is an example of a. inference

huck's relationship with food is a prominent theme throughout the novel, and during his time on jackson's island and working his way down river, huck revels in and enjoys his ad hoc dining. in the first chapter, we observe huck is ironically trapped in a "civilized" world, when he would prefer to live freely in nature.