Reference no: EM13679402

1. (TCO 1) What skill does a student need for critical thinking?
To present evidence in an order that contributes to a persuasive argument
To separate fact from opinion
To construct and evaluate claims and arguments independently of their power to win a following
To select the strongest set of supporting data
All of the above

Question 2. 2. (TCO 1, 2, 4) What is the simple definition of an issue?
An element of political controversy
A point of conflict between people or groups of people
Nothing more than a question of whether a given claim is true or not
A cultural claim by a group of people with an allegation of rightness
An allegation of truth or falsehood

Question 3. 3. (TCO 1, 2, 3) What are the two parts of an argument?
Description and detail
Problem and proposal
Explanation and clarification
Definition and example
Premise and conclusion

Question 4. 4. (TCOs 2, 3) For inductive arguments, how do we measure their quality as stronger or weaker?
Based on how much support their premises provide for the conclusion
Based on requiring little translation into syllogistic form
Based on their appearing in a standard form
Based on the clear definition of critical words
Based on the syllogism that can be formed from them



Question 5. 5. (TCO 1, 2) The mode of persuasion that Aristotle defined as ethos refers to arguments based on what?
Whether a decision is ethical
Being alert to influences in one's thinking
The speaker's personal attributes
The audience's emotions
Using information and reasoning

Question 6. 6. (TCO 6) What is the first step in trying to understand arguments?
To isolate the argument from nonargumentative materials attached to it
To find and eliminate elements of confusion
To find and identify the conclusion or thesis of the passage
To determine the intentions of the author
To research background information on the issues

Question 7. 7. (TCOs 6, 7, 8, 9) Which of the five items below is usually NOT a part of a good argumentative essay?
A statement of the issue
A statement of one's position on the issue
A statement of one's authority or expertise
Arguments that support one's position on the issue
Rebuttals of arguments that support a contrary position



Question 8. 8. (TCOs 6, 8, 9) What is grouping ambiguity?
When one arbitrarily classifies people as a group for unclear purposes
When people share an affinity that is not obvious
When it is not clear whether a word is being used to refer to a group or to the individuals within a group
When an author or speaker seeks a group to blame as a scapegoat
When labeling classifications of people with epithets

Question 9. 9. (TCOs 2, 6, 7, 8) Which of the following would suggest a lack of credibility in a claim?
When it is accompanied by other claims that have credibility
The claim conflicts with what we have observed
When the person presenting the claim has something to gain by our believing it
When it brings something we have not learned before
When it comes from an interested party

Question 10. 10. (TCOs 1, 6, 7, 9) What is the purpose of the rhetorical device called a euphemism?
To replace ambiguous terms with clearer ones
To hide the agenda of interested parties
To replace another term with a neutral or positive expression instead of one with negative associations
To replace vague terms with others that communicate more information
To replace other expressions with new ones that are expected to be more acceptable

Question 11. 11. (TCOs 1, 7) What factor identifies a loaded question?
It has a true premise and an untrue conclusion.
It requires an answer from you.
It is very persuasive based on true and accepted premise claims.
It disguises the correct answer.
It is based on one or more unwarranted or unjustified assumptions.

Question 12. 12. (TCOs 1, 2) What is the circumstantial ad hominem fallacy?
Attack on an argument based on the events coinciding with its presentation
Support of an argument based on the professional role of the person presenting it
Support of an argument based on the courage of the presenter
Attack on an argument based on internal consistencies
Attack on an argument based on the personal requirements and obligations of the person presenting it

Question 13. 13. (TCOs 6, 7, 8) To the overall topic of burden of proof, what is the purpose of the rule called initial plausibility? (Points : 4)
The initial response of listeners or readers based on their background information
The plain and common sense of a claim when first presented
The greater burden of proof placed on someone who asserts a claim
The status of being the first claim or argument presented when a controversy begins
The greater burden of proof placed upon the first person to try to refute an argument



Question 14. 14. (TCOs 1, 2) About what does a categorical claim say something?
The burden of proof
A shared interest in the outcome
The orderly processes of biology
The primary documents of early philosophers
Classes of things

Question 15. 15. (TCOs 3, 4) What is the purpose of a Venn Diagram?
To give a graphic illustration of standard-form claims
To show how nouns and noun phrases relate
To demonstrate the orderly processes of biology
To show the primary characteristics of things
To illustrate the classes of things

Question 16. 16. (TCOs 3, 4, 8, 9) Why is it necessary to translate claims into standard forms for categorical logic? (Points : 4)
Claims about issues must all be accepted as true.
Claims must be separated from arguments.
Claims must be matched in pairs by category.
Claims must be in either both positive or both negative form.
Claims cannot be compared for logic without being in matching and equivalent form.

Question 17. 17. (TCOs 2, 3, 4) Logical relationships between corresponding claims of standard-form categorical logic are illustrated in the graphic square of opposition. What is known about two claims when they are called subcontrary claims?
They would share the same predicate term.
They would share the same subject term.
They need not be in the same standard form of translation.
They can both be true, but they cannot both be false.
Only one of them can be true.

Question 18. 18. (TCOs 2, 3, 4) How do we work the categorical operation called obversion?
By changing the claims from being in the same class to being outside the class
By limiting the scope of terms used to those within a class
By changing a claim from positive to negative, or vice versa
By changing one claim to referring outside of a class but leaving the other one inside the class
By making an argument invalid in form

Question 19. 19. (TCOs 2, 5) What is meant by the term random sample?
Every member of a population has an equal chance of being included in the sample.
The size of the sample has not been predetermined.
There is no systematic way of choosing the sample.
The sample has been validated by the considerations by which it was chosen.
Nobody has been excluded from the sample for reasons of prejudice.

Question 20. 20. (TCOs 2, 5) In studying a sample, what is meant by the term sampling frame?
A precise definition of the population and the attribute in which one is interested
The diversity of the whole population that is being studied
Some part of the population intentionally left out of the target population
Some biasing factor excluded from the target population
The size of the sample itself



Question 21. 21. (TCOs 1, 5, 8, 9) What is the inductive "fallacy of anecdotal evidence"?
A version of hasty generalizing where the sample is just a story
Bypassing standard questions to ask for opinions
Telling personal experiences
Bypassing standard questioning to accept data that does not match the possible answers
Asking hypothetical questions of "what if..."

Question 22. 22. (TCOs 1, 2) What is an analogue?
A version of hasty generalizing where the sample is just a story
The idea that one can understand predictability and overcome its randomness
Telling personal experiences
The idea that sequences of occurrences can be predicted
A thing that has similar attributes to another thing

Question 23. 23. (TCOs 1, 2, 3) What are the two kinds of causal explanations?
Physical and behavioral
Analogous and relevant
True and false
General and specific
Descriptive and prescriptive

Question 24. 24. (TCOs 2, 6) The utilitarian ethics are best summarized as
if an act will produce more happiness than will alternatives, it is the right thing to do.
good acts produce good outcomes.
hedonic pleasure is the highest good.
what is good is determined by what is useful in a practical sense.
pain is to be avoided at all costs.

Question 25. 25. (TCOs 1, 6) "If someone appears to be violating the consistency principle, then the burden of proof is on that person to show he or she is in fact not violating the principle." Why is this principle necessary?
Moral arguments need to be specific.
It is how one deduces the right thing to do.
Out of fairness, separate moral cases, if similar, must be given similar treatment.
Moral explanations need to show the reasons for the results.
All moral claims are relative.