(1) Everything can be determined.
(2) Determinism is the thesis that everything can be determined.
Therefore, (3) the world is deterministic.
For example, suppose I am raking the leaves outside my house. Then the fact that I am raking the leaves can be determined. It can be determined by anybody driving past my house. It can be determined by a high resolution satellite (on a clear day with no overhanging trees). It can be determined by merely witnessing me raking the leaves. The same goes for anything else that happens. Its occurrence can be determined.
For (1) not to be true would be to undermine the assumption used in court trials. All court trials assume that the occurrence of any crime can always be determined (even if not by the available evidence).
For (2) not to be true would be to say that there are things that cannot be determined in determinism. But obviously then, determinism as we know it would not hold.
So what do you think? Isn't this a good argument for determinism?