This would be an answer
But I don't know exactly what your answer choices are.
It could be argued that the Mexican Revolution was fundamentally a conflict between "<span>a. Conservative landowners and landless peasants," since it was impossible for these peasants to have any type of upward mobility. </span>
<span>The level of output produced when he labor market is in equilibrium is called the potential GDP.</span>
Answer:
a. Follows with certainty (necessarily)
Explanation:
In a deductively valid argument, if the premises are true, then, the conclusion is necessarily true. It is impossible for a deductively valid argument to have false premises and and a true conclusion, or to have true premises and a false conclusion. It would not make sense.
An example of this type of argument would be:
If it rains, I will be carrying un umbrella. It's raining, therefore, I'm carrying un umbrella.
