The phrase "adequate argument" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the sufficiency or appropriateness of reasoning or evidence in support of a claim or position.
Example: "The researcher presented an adequate argument to support her hypothesis, addressing potential counterarguments effectively."
Alternatives: "sufficient reasoning" or "valid justification".
However, such research has mostly focused on the design of adequate argument-based knowledge formalisms.
The appellate court disagreed, partly because the brother, who represented himself without a lawyer, didn't offer adequate legal argument for his position and didn't follow other necessary procedures.
Kant had not yet articulated a definitive break with the approach of the rationalist metaphysics of his predecessors, so his discussions presuppose the validity of the enterprise of constructing an adequate theoretical argument for the existence of God.
Those who hold this view, such as Inayat Bunglawala, must reject Dawkins' claim that the case for religion is felled by the sword of reason, either because they believe that adequate counter-arguments are available or because they reject the relevance of reason in determining the case for faith, which brings them to the second kind of criticism, advanced even by atheists such as Martin Kettle.
The proof of the main result is based on Schauder's fixed point theorem combined with adequate variational arguments and a penalization technique.
In [25], the author studied the existence of solutions to a variational inequality involving nonlocal elliptic operators and obtained the existence of solutions by using Schauder's fixed point theorem combined with adequate variational arguments and a penalization technique.
In the absence of strong empirical evidence of bias, e.g. due to lack of adequate randomisation, arguments for correcting potential bias impact still rely largely on logical considerations.
Belief in the existence of God was not regarded as basic or foundational in this way but was thought to require adequate evidence or arguments.
The natural theology tradition held that, in order to be rational, religious belief must be supported by adequate evidences or arguments.
Galbraith and Stillmann ([2006]), p. 150 write 'In some cases, an adequate response requires arguments that integrate mathematical knowledge with the impact of this knowledge in the real situations to justify interpretation'.
