What makes an argument a "good" argument — and what extra does critical thinking demand on top of that?
A good argument has all-true premises that give good grounds for the conclusion (deductively valid+sound, or inductively strong); critical thinking adds intellectual and ethical standards on top.
The baseline for a good argument:
- all premises are true, and
- the premises give good grounds to accept the conclusion — which they do when the argument is either deductively sound or inductively strong.
But "critical thinking" raises the bar further by adding intellectual and ethical standards. The striking consequence: an argument that is deductively sound can still fail to count as "good" if it is, say, deeply opaque, stuffed with irrelevant statements, and grossly incomplete in examining the relevant evidence.
Tip: Logical soundness is necessary but not sufficient for a genuinely good argument. Validity and true premises get you a correct inference; clarity, relevance and completeness are what make it a good piece of reasoning.