Critical Thinking ch2

Question 1

hoe heet het als iemand ambiguity gebruikt om de content of een argument te confusen

Answer 1

fallacy of equivocation

Question 1

what is it called when someone rhetorically tries to obscure a persuader’s true point

Answer 1

the rhetorical ploy of trading on an equivocation

Question 2

ambiguity=

Answer 2

wanneer er meer dan een mogelijke manier is om een zin te interpreteren

Question 3

2 types of ambiguity

Answer 3

1. lexical ambiguity
2. syntactic ambiguity

Question 4

lexical ambiguity=

Answer 4

when a word has more than one meaning.

Question 5

hoe heten de woorden bij lexical ambiguity waar de expression ook bij hoort

Answer 5

extension van een term

all square things are square, dit gaat dus helemaal door

Question 6

voorbeeld lexical ambiguity

Answer 6

ball, curious

Question 7

homonyms=

Answer 7

Words that sound the
same but have different meanings and often different spellings are called homonyms.

mussel/muscle

Question 8

syntactic ambiguity =

Answer 8

wanneer de arrangements of words in a sentence zo is dat het op meerdere manieren geinterpreteerd kan worden

The president has cancelled a trip to Canada to play golf.

Question 9

welke vorm van ambiguity is moeilijker te interpreteren

Answer 9

syntactic vaak moeilijker dan lexical

Question 10

vague=

Answer 10

the meaning of a word or expression is vague if it is indefinite or if it is uncertain what is conveyed by the word in the context under consideration.

Question 11

dus verschil vagueness en ambiguity

Answer 11

bij ambiguity weet je wel de duidelijke definitie van een woord, maar niet welke definitie hierbij hoort.

bij vagueness is er gewoon geen duidelijke definitie (weapons of mass destruction???)

Question 12

wat voor soort woorden worden vaak in rhetorical power gebruikt, en zijn vague:

Answer 12

‘rights’, ‘liberal’, ‘harassment’, ‘racism’, ‘sexism

Question 13

hyperbole=

Answer 13

the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.

Question 14

wat hebben alle ordinary words?

Answer 14

een range of things to which it applies: extension

yellow, square.

Question 15

primary connotation =

Answer 15

the literal meaning of a word, the definition

schaap

Question 16

secondary connotation =

Answer 16

what we associate with the definition

wol, gras, veld, herder etc

Question 17

op welke connotation baseren we metaforen

Answer 17

on the basis of secondary connotations. vaak is de primaire connotation ook niet waar (iemand een varken noemen: diegene is niet letterlijk een varken)

Question 18

wat is een eis voor een primary connotation

Answer 18

somehing falls within this extension of a term only if all the conditions are met.

Question 19

wat is een eis voor secondary connotation

Answer 19

Things that fall under the term will generally exhibit these characteristics, but not always. there can be things that falls under the term but lack a characteristic included under the secondary connotation.

bv een kaal schaap is nog steeds een schaap. of een schaap dat niet in de wei staat

Question 20

wanneer kan er verschil zitten tussen primary en secondary connotation

Answer 20

It is difficult to pin down the precise meaning of a word such as ‘left-wing’ because, on the one hand, its primary connotation is very difficult to pin down and, on the other, its secondary connotation is so rich.

Question 21

verschil rhetorical question en declarative sentence

Answer 21

Rhetorical questions take the form of a question but indirectly assert a proposition, whereas a declarative sentence directly asserts a proposition.

Question 22

uitleg rhetorical question

Answer 22

Speakers and writers often use rhetorical questions when they’re making a point they assume to be obvious, so the answer to the question ‘goes without saying’. However, in many cases the point is neither obvious nor universally agreed. Rhetorical questions obfuscate speakers’ and writers’ intended meanings because they make it more difficult to interpret whether or not a speaker/writer really does support a given claim.

“what boy did not do this at 14?”

Question 23

irony=

Answer 23

This takes the form of language that, taken literally, would convey the opposite of what they wish to convey, or something otherwise very different from it.

twerken en dan zeggen: oh very tasteful

Question 24

implicitly relative sentence =

Answer 24

they make a comparison with
some group of things, but that comparison is not explicitly mentioned.

• She earns an above-average salary.
• It is the best of its kind.
• Great Uncle Eddie is a fast runner.
• Taxes are high.
• The rent on our house is low.
• I have a very, very large brain.

Question 25

Quantifiers=

Answer 25

quantifiers are words and phrases that tell us how many/much of something there are/is, or how often something happens.

• All Maseratis drive too fast.
• Politicians are often self-serving.
• Few lawyers support the proposed judicial reforms.
• Nearly all the students passed the course.
• She likes hardly any of her fellow students

Question 26

wat is het probleem met quantifiers

Answer 26

1. niet vaak met sufficient precision, daardoor is de proposition niet duidelijk en open to misinterpretation and rhetorical abuse.
2. sommige quantifiers zijn zelf vague (bv sommige: whoeveel zijn dat er???)
3. soms geven mensen geen quantifiers, terwijl ze dat wel bedoelen (professoren geven studenten geen kans om te klagen -> bedoelen hiermee de meeste professoren)

Question 27

counterexamples =

Answer 27

Exceptions that we use to challenge the truth of a generalising claim

Question 28

counterexample van:

alle studenten werken hard

Answer 28

point out various students we know who study very little and spend the majority of their time gaming

Question 29

generalisations =

Answer 29

‘categorical’ statements involving quantifiers such as ‘all’, ‘every’,
‘always’, ‘no’, ‘never’ and so on, but also ‘most’, ‘usually’ and the like.

Question 30

hard generalisations=

Answer 30

gaat over iedereen, geen exeptions

Question 31

soft generalisations

Answer 31

laat zien dat we trends zien in bepaalde dingen, tends to be true

Question 32

woorden bij soft generalisations

Answer 32

normally, typically, generally, usually, on average, for the most part.

Question 33

woorden bij hard generalisations

Answer 33

‘all’, ‘every’, ‘no’, ‘always’, ‘never’

Question 34

If someone makes a claim that is intended as a hard generalisation and we can find a counterexample to it, then we have refuted their claim. but then the soft generalisation is true.

Answer 34

oke

Question 35

wat is het probleem van soft generalisations

Answer 35

1. people may take it as a hard generalisation
2. it might wrongly be taken as asserting something about the innate or
   genetic qualities of someone/something else

Question 36

rethorical force =

Answer 36

the rhetorical aspect of a sentence’s meaning

it is the emotive or otherwise suggestive
window dressing surrounding the proposition, and it may be used to persuade us

Question 37

dus nog een keer wat is een rhetorische vraag, en wat is rhetoric

Answer 37

retorische vraag=vraag waar je geen echt antwoord op wil

rhetoric = the art of speaking or writing to persuade people (the magic of words)

Question 38

implicature =

Answer 38

Implicature is meaning that is not stated but which one can reasonably take to be
intended given the context in which the sentence is written or uttered.

Question 39

The sentence ‘That young man left early’
expresses the same proposition as the rhetorically charged ‘That lazy so-and-so
bunked off early’. But, while the former merely expresses a fact about when a
person left, the second, by its inclusion of ‘lazy’ and use of the ‘so-and-so’ and
‘bunked off’ might function not only to inform us of a fact, but also to manipulate our sympathies concerning the person in question.

‘That young man left early’
vs ‘That lazy so-and-so bunked off early’.

zelfde proposition, maar de tweede is met rhetorical force

Answer 39

oke

Question 40

waar heeft implicature heel veel mee te maken

Answer 40

met de context

Question 41

voorbeeld implicature

Answer 41

Suppose, for example, that a student’s parent asks one of her lecturers how she is progressing in her studies and he replies, ‘Well, she hasn’t been thrown out for missing classes.’ The lecturer doesn’t actually state ‘She’s not doing very well’, but the implicature is that she’s not.

Question 42

It is also a way of communicating something without incurring the full-
responsibility of having explicitly said it

Answer 42

= implicature statement

Question 43

de receiver kan een implicature statement alleen begrijpen als ze fully aware zijn van de relevante context

Answer 43

oke

Question 44

wat is een definitie of wat heeft een definitie

Answer 44

necessary and sufficient conditions for
counting something as an instance of X (X functions here as a placeholder; it stands for any object or feature, such as an argument or a house). The necessary conditions for being X are the conditions that a thing must satisfy if it is to count as an X. The sufficient conditions for being an X are the conditions such that if something meets them, it is enough for it to count as an X

Question 45

voorbeeld van definitie van een ewe

Answer 45

A ewe must be female and a sheep, and its being female and a sheep is enough to make it a ewe. Being female is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being a ewe. And although it may have wool, it may say ‘baah’ and it may eat grass, these are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions of its being a ewe. (Our earlier discussion of primary and secondary connotation provides insight into the role of these nonessential features in determining the meanings of terms.) Contrariwise, being a ewe is a sufficient condition for being a sheep, but it isn’t a necessary condition for being sheep; a ram is also a sheep (a male sheep)

Question 46

rhetorical ploys & fallacies=

Answer 46

when people tend to persuade us in ways that appear to provide motivation for doing/believing something, but do not give us good reasons to do or believe that thing

Question 47

verschil rhetorical ploys en fallacies

Answer 47

rhetorical ploys = non argumentative (they dont actually give reasons)
fallacies = argumentative (they give reasons, but they arent good)

Question 48

een aantal soorten rethorical ploys

Answer 48

novelty, popularity, compassion, pity, guilt, fear, cuteness, sexiness,
hipness, coolness, wealth, power, ridicule

Question 49

appeal to novelty =

Answer 49

Often this ploy appeals to our desire not to miss out on a new trend, or arouses our fear of appearing outdated in our tastes

(vote for change!)

“new”
“latest”

Question 50

appeal to popularity=

Answer 50

this ploy appeals to our desire to run with the crowd, not to appear different from the norm and not to miss out on what others have.

It is commonly used to persuade us to buy things, but also occurs frequently as a means to persuade us to adopt a belief or to follow a certain course of action.

“most downloaded, most trusted”

Question 51

voorbeeld rhetorical appeal to popularity

Answer 51

P1) The most downloaded music-streaming app must be the best app for
steaming music.
P2) The most downloaded music-steaming app is Splatifi.
C1) Splatifi is the best app for steaming music.

wel valid, maar niet sound: eerste premises slaat nergens op.

Question 52

appeal to compassion, pity or guilt

Answer 52

This common rhetorical ploy operates by attempting to move us to do something
purely by evoking a feeling of compassion towards the recipients of the suggested act or belief, or a feeling of guilt about their plight. The feeling alone does not provide a good reason for us to perform the act in question.

dus het gevoel alleen is niet genoeg. maar het kan er wel voor zorgen dat we naar argumenten zoeken die wel goed zijn.

Question 53

P1) A donation to the Worldwide Fund for Children would probably help to
alleviate the suffering of children from extreme hunger.
P2) I should try to alleviate extreme suffering where it’s possible for me to do so.
P3) It is possible for me to make a donation to the WWFC.
C) Probably, I should make a donation to the WWFC

wat is dit argument?

Answer 53

inductively forceful. kan ook zeggen dat het argument sound is.

Question 54

Appeal to cuteness=

Answer 54

This rhetorical technique supplements its words with images of children, animals
or animated characters to deliver a message

Question 55

appeal to sexiness

Answer 55

To those who would desire the sexy person depicted in the advertisement, the product is made to seem desirable by its association with the sexy person. But it is also made to seem desirable to those who would like to think of themselves as sexy in the way that the sexy person is.

Question 56

Appeal to fear (also known as scare tactics) vs genuine warnings

Answer 56

In instances of the appeal, there is no warranted connection between the fear elicited and taking the suggested course of action or accepting the claim, whereas in the case of a warning, we are given a good reason to act.

Question 57

Appeal to ridicule

Answer 57

This ploy occurs when a speaker/writer attacks their opponent’s position or claim
by casting it in a light that will make it seem ridiculous to their audience.

Question 58

voorbeeld appeal to ridicule

Answer 58

‘This is political correctness gone mad! If we deny these positions to everyone who ever had a little too much to drink in college, or got a bit loud and wild once in a while, almost everyone in the top echelons of business, the media, the judiciary and politics would be out of a job!’ The scrutiny of allegations of serious behaviour is made to look ridiculous by making it seem as though it is on a par with, and no worse than, much more common and less serious bad behaviour that can be common among students and other young people

Question 59

the direct attack and hard sell=

Answer 59

simple, slogans en hele korte zinnen zonder uitleg

The direct attack involves the bold assertion of a position or
command. The hard sell is the direct attack repeated.

The hard sell is simply the direct attack repeated persistently. Children
are notably effective with it. The persuader just keeps it up until the subject of their attack gives in and does as they want, the persuader thereby having influenced their target by verbal means without giving reasons for doing as they command.

say no to higher tuition fees

Question 60

scare quotes=

Answer 60

quotation marks placed round a word or phrase to draw attention to an unusual or arguably inaccurate use.
“alysum seekers”
“global warming”

The speaker/writer takes key words in terms of which their opponent expresses their views and attempts to discredit those views by making them appear ridiculous or suspicious through the use of scare quotes
dus ze attacken de legitimacy of the justification provided for those views

Question 61

trading on an equivocation=

Answer 61

This ploy deliberately exploits the ambiguity, and in some cases the vagueness, of a word or phrase in the given context

Petrol consumption zero, the new Barolla and Trav4 diesels are here.

Mr Smith, who is believed to have links to terrorist organisations, was seen
boarding a flight at Heathrow Airport. (links to…? what do u mean????)

Question 62

welke tactic wordt vaak in smear campaigns gebruikt

Answer 62

trading on an equivocation: This tactic of evoking guilt by association is frequently used by people conducting
smear campaigns – if someone’s alleged connection to some wrongdoing or wrongdoer is repeated often enough the association tends to be cemented in an
audience’s mind.

Question 63

equivocation definitie

Answer 63

dubbelzinnigheid

Question 64

trading on implicature=

Answer 64

This is the tactic of using a statement’s implicature to mislead the audience. Since the proposition implicated is not actually stated by the speaker, the speaker can hope to avoid responsibility for having misled the audience. This is
a common tactic in political discussion.

Question 65

many questions aka leading question or complex question=

Answer 65

It is the tactic of posing a question that appears to seek an explanation for some proposition, p, thereby misleadingly implying that p is true.

Question 65

voorbeeld trading on implicature

Answer 65

If the government increases income tax, it will be a further burden on working families.

maar… de politician knows that the government in question is not actually considering the tax increase

Question 65

smokescreen=

Answer 65

changing the subject naar een ander (soms related, soms niet) probleem.

Question 65

voorbeeld many questions=

Answer 65

ask if they would be more or less likely to vote for that candidate if they knew that he supported unlimited access to firearms.

terwijl dat misschien helemaal niet zo is.

Question 66

voorbeeld probleem smokescreen

Answer 66

Consider, for instance, a company CEO
trying to defend a senior executive’s reputation after they have been involved in some kind of socially unacceptable behaviour. The events have come to light
because an employee has leaked a confidential internal report into the matter. In defending the person, the CEO responds by launching into a speech about how the leak constitutes a dreadful dereliction of duty and breach of trust.

Question 67

whataboutism=

Answer 67

een drogreden waarmee iemand de beschuldiging van een misstand niet weerlegt, maar zijn of haar opponent er met een retorische vraag What about …? (Hoe zit het met …?) van beticht schuldig te zijn aan een andere ernstige misstand.

Question 68

voorbeeld whataboutism

Answer 68

when a child is being told off and they try to distract attention onto a sibling or friend saying something like ‘What about her? She hasn’t tidied her room either!’

Question 69

whataboutism may also occur in the form of…

Answer 69

a fallacy: tu quoque
(dus dan wel met redenen)

Question 70

2 vormen van smokescreen

Answer 70

1. whataboutism
2. criticising the tone of someones contribution to a discussion (how they say something) “het gaat om je toon”

dit is dus allemaal smokescreen

Question 71

buzzwords=

Answer 71

This is the technique of using fashionable or otherwise currently ‘hot’ words or phrases that are loaded with rhetorical power due to their rich secondary connotation.

“change” “left-wing”

Question 72

jargon =

Answer 72

Jargon is an often impenetrable way of speaking or writing that uses words or
phrases that are likely to be unfamiliar to most of the audience, or which uses
familiar words in unfamiliar ways.

Jargon wields strong rhetorical
power. If you use jargon correctly then you appear to be ‘in the know’, one of the
in-crowd. So it functions to provide its users with a kind of exclusivity and
excludes those who don’t understand or know how to use the insiders’ language.
Jargon is also used to obscure the true meaning or implication of what’s being said.

Question 73

acronyms=

Answer 73

Acronyms are series of initials used as though they are a word to provide an
abbreviation for a name or phrase. As with jargon, the rhetorical power of the use of acronyms lies in their ability to create insiders who are able to decode them and understand what they are being used to convey, and to exclude those who aren’t language and rhetoric ‘in the know’.

tegen coassistenten gaan praten over niertx en dbc

Question 74

spin doctor =

Answer 74

a spokesperson employed to give a favourable interpretation of events to the media, especially on behalf of a political party.

banks are not simply ‘giving them money’; rather, they are ‘injecting liquidity’.

Question 75

gaslighting=

Answer 75

Gas-lighting occurs when we use language rhetorically to cast doubt onto
someone’s claims by making the speaker or writer themselves seem and feel less
confident about their claim, usually a claim about something negative that has happened or is happening to them.

the gas-lighter manipulates
their victim into doubting their own memories and perceptions, to the extent that they might even doubt their own sanity

Question 76

voorbeeld gaslighting

Answer 76

mark rutte die zegt dat hij ergens geen actieve herinnering aan heeft

Question 77

nog een keer trading on an equivocation =

Answer 77

Trading on an equivocation occurs when someone knowingly makes an
ambiguous or vague statement that may be true when interpreted in one particular way, but when interpreted in another may be false, but also more favourable to the position being advanced or to the product being advertised

Question 78

nog een keer smokescreen

Answer 78

Smokescreen occurs when one talks about some highly controversial, compelling or otherwise arresting issue or object in an effort to divert the audience momentarily from the issue under discussion. Whataboutism is a type of smokescreen. A successful smokescreen causes the audience to overlook the fact that the issue has not been addressed.

Question 79

welke begrippen horen bij trading on an equivocation

Answer 79

lexical and syntactic ambiguity

Question 80

My opponents will say that we have a moral duty to honour our United
Nations commitments and provide refugees with a safe haven. But I
say to you: look at all these people arriving here and then claiming state
benefits – they are sucking the taxpayer dry

=

Answer 80

smokescreen

Question 81

Fatbusters – the most successful weight-loss programme on the market
today!

=

Answer 81

equivocation -> wat is most successful?