Richard Feynman played the bongos and was a world famous physicist,
Sheldon plays the bongos,
ergo, Sheldon will be a world famous physicist.
Here is a great example of a valid argument that is not factually correct, hence is not sound. We see that both premises are correct; however, the conclusion is inaccurate. Of course Sheldon does not directly state this, but his logic behind his “logic” retreats to how children usually believe if they mimic a famous person, then not only will they be ‘exactly’ alike this so called famous person, but would as well one day be famous as they are. For example, many kids playing sports will purchase identical equipment to their favorite professional athletes, believing if they use this equipment they will be exactly like their idol and one day attain their identical position in fame. Unfortunately one cannot accomplish such tasks by only mimicking their famous idols. Concluding, that indeed this form is logically correct, the content is quite frankly false; thus, disallowing the argument from being sound.
The logic behind this allows for huge business opportunities for companies; and more so for athletic companies, (as i used an example in the previous paragraph) for they can idolize the best athletes and pay them to wear their company’s equipment. For example Sydney Crosby uses Reebok (Only) and millions of young children that play hockey now want to purchase Reebok equipment specifically to match Crosby.
Therefore, although Sheldon is a “brilliant” scientist, he sure thinks like a seven year old!