For each symbolic argument below, identify the valid reasoning structure or invalid reasoning error it represents. Argument #1: - Premise: parrow q Premise: p Conclusion: q Logical form: square Argument #2: - Premise: parrow q Premise: -p =p Conclusion: -q Logical form: Select an answer square Argument #3: Premise: parrow q Premise: a Conclusion: ..p Logical form: square Argument #4: - Premise: parrow q Premise:- a Conclusion: -p Logical form: square

To identify the valid reasoning structure or invalid reasoning error for each argument, let's analyze them one by one:**Argument #1:**- Premise: - Premise: - Conclusion: This argument follows the logical form known as **Modus Ponens**, which is a valid form of reasoning. If implies and is true, then must also be true.**Argument #2:**- Premise: - Premise: - Conclusion: This argument represents an invalid reasoning error known as **Denying the Antecedent**. Just because is false does not necessarily mean that is false.**Argument #3:**- Premise: - Premise: - Conclusion: This argument represents an invalid reasoning error known as **Affirming the Consequent**. Just because is true does not necessarily mean that is true.**Argument #4:**- Premise: - Premise: - Conclusion: This argument follows the logical form known as **Modus Tollens**, which is a valid form of reasoning. If implies and is false, then must also be false.In summary:- Argument #1: Modus Ponens (valid)- Argument #2: Denying the Antecedent (invalid)- Argument #3: Affirming the Consequent (invalid)- Argument #4: Modus Tollens (valid)