3(a) Determine whether the argument is valid and give a reason why. Punishment for crime is never justified. This is because we know from a great deal of carefully assembled and analysed empirical data that punishment is not a deterrent. And punishment for crimes is justified if it actually deters people from committing them. Select one: The argument is invalid, punishment might still be a deterrent. The argument is invalid, it commits the fallacy of denying the antecedent - there might be other reasons why crime is a deterrent. The argument is valid, if the premises are true, it's impossible for punishment to be justified. The argument is valid, follows the valid form of modus tollens. The argument is valid, the premises are true, so the conclusion is also. The argument is invalid, even if the premises were true, punishment might still be justified for other reasons 3(b) Choose the generalised form that represents the argument. A = punishment is justified B = punishment deters people from committing crimes Select one: 1. If A then B. 2. Not B Therefore, C: Not A. 1. If A then B 2. Not A. Therefore, C: Not B 1. If B then A 2. Not A Therefore, C: Not B 1. If B then A 2. Not B Therefore, C. Not A