What does the term "invalid argument" refer to in LSAT Logical Reasoning?

The term "invalid argument" specifically refers to a situation where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. In other words, even if the premises are true, the conclusion may still be false. This highlights a fundamental aspect of logical reasoning, which is that validity is concerned with the structural relationship between premises and conclusion, rather than the actual truth of the premises themselves.

For instance, if an argument states that all dogs are animals and concludes that therefore all cats are dogs, this argument is invalid because the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. The premises may be true, but the invalidity lies in the incorrect connection made between them leading to the conclusion.

Understanding this concept is crucial, as it helps in evaluating arguments critically and distinguishing between sound reasoning and logical fallacies.