I had a thought about the path-connectedness of $\mathbb{R}$. The standard way of showing the path-connectedness of $\mathbb{R}$ can be that it is both open and connected and so must be path-connected too.
But I had thought about another argument, say $a$, $b\in\mathbb{R}$, can we just define a path that connects $a$ and $b$ as follows? $\gamma:[0, 1]\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\gamma(t)=a+(b-a)t$ which precisely take $a$ to $b$ and the image precisely lie in $\mathbb{R}$ as well since $\mathbb{R}$ is closed under multiplication and addition?
Obviously, the first method sounds much more rigorous but it will be much longer to prove so I was wondering if the second method is insufficient in proving the path-connectedness?
Actually, your method is perfectly sound and rigorous. It is actually the natural way of doing it. And, in fact what you descrined as the “standard way” of proving it doesn't make sense. By that argument, and sense every topological space is an open subset of itself, every connected topological space would be path-connected true, which is not true.