Exam 3

Question 1

Rhetoric

Answer 1

Persuasive languages primarily used to influence beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors, rather than to prove something logically

Question 2

Weaselers

Answer 2

Help protect a claim from criticism by watering it down, somewhat weakening it
Ex: “up to 5 miles per gallon”, “up to 50% off”, “15 mins could save you 15% or more”

Question 3

Stereotypes

Answer 3

Can be pos/neg. It is a cultural belief/idea abt social groups attributions, usually simplified or exaggerated

Question 4

Downplayers

Answer 4

Attempt to make someone/thing look less important or significant
Ex: Air quotes or saying “so called”

Question 5

Hyperbole

Answer 5

Extravagant overstatement or exaggeration. Can be combined with stereotypes.
Ex: “Everyone downloads music illegally”, “Nobody in the Tea Party likes blacks”

Question 6

Euphemism

Answer 6

Neutral or positive expression used in place of one that carries neg. Associations
Ex: “increase revenues” instead of raise taxes”, “Waterboarding” instead of torture

Question 7

Dysphemism

Answer 7

Used to produce a neg. effect on someone’s attitude abt something, or to tone down the positive associations it may have.
Ex: “scheme” instead of legislative proposal, “noise” instead of music

Question 8

Proof surrogates

Answer 8

Expression used to suggest evidence w/o providing it.
Ex: “studies show airborne will reduce duration of common cold” (doesn’t give any detail about the studies”, saying “it’s obvious that” (where’s the proof tho?)

Question 9

Innuendo

Answer 9

Uses power of suggestion to imply or insinuate something. It’s not stated explicitly
Ex: “I am proof that at least one candidate in this race doesn’t make stuff up” (doesn’t say the others are doing it but implies it)

Question 10

Ridicule/Sarcasm

Answer 10

Widely used to put something in a bad light

Question 11

Rhetorical questions

Answer 11

Questions we ask when we don’t really want an answer- way of saying something or being persuasive.

Question 12

rhetorical definitions

Answer 12

Purpose is persuasion, not to objectively define the word

Ex: “abortion means ruthless killing of innocent human beings” (not defining abortion, just saying it’s bad)

Question 13

rhetorical explanations

Answer 13

Purpose is persuasion, not to objectively explain something
Ex: “as soon as obama came into office he began systematically shredding the US constitution” (not saying he literally put it in a shredder)

Question 14

Rhetorical comparisons/analogies (Non-argumentative analogies)

Answer 14

Similes & metaphors. Likens 2+ things to make one of them appear better or worse than the other. Purpose is persuasion.
Ex: “talking to me neighbor is like negotiating with the Iranians

Question 15

loaded questions

Answer 15

Form of innuendo and contain an unwarranted or unjustified assumption in the question

Question 16

formal fallacies

Answer 16

A fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer advances a deductive arg. That has an invalid logical form.

Question 17

fallacies of relevance

Answer 17

Flawed args. Having at least one one irrelevant premise. Conclusion can be T/F

Question 18

Ad Hominem

Answer 18

attacking the arguer, not the argument. 2 types:

1. Circumstantial- attempts to discredit the opponent’s argument by alluding to circumstances that affect the opponent.
2. inconsistency/tu quoque-attacks arguer for being inconsistent

Question 19

Ad Populum (appeal to the people)

Answer 19

Occurs when we urge others to accept a claim simply b/c all/most others believe it to be true.

Question 20

Ad Baculum (appeal to force)

Answer 20

When arguer threatens to do harm to listener if the args. conclusion is not accepted. Threat is irrelevant to issue at hand and is a scare tactic

Question 21

Appeal to pity

Answer 21

Arguer attempts to support conclusion by evoking pity from person and is irrelevant to issue at hand. (* Sometimes pity is relevant to an arg.)

Question 22

apple polishing

Answer 22

Arguer attempts to support a conclusion by merely flattering person

Question 23

straw man

Answer 23

When arguer attempts to refute another’s arg. by distorting, misrepresenting, or mischaracterizing the other arguers position

Question 24

Red herring/smokescreen

Answer 24

All fallacies of relevance are red herrings. These attempt to distract attention away from issue under consideration to a dif, but subtly related issue.

Question 25

Fallacies of presumption

Answer 25

Problematic presumptions that are caused by unwarranted or unjustified assumptions.

Question 26

False dichotomy/ False dilemma

Answer 26

When someone argues that we only have 2 choices when other options do exist

Question 27

perfectionist fallacy

Answer 27

Subset of false dilemma that says we only have to choices to do something perfectly or not do it at all. (j b/c we can’t do something to perfection, does not mean we should not try at all)

Question 28

begging the question

Answer 28

Assuming what you should be proving. Tries to support a claim by offering as “evidence” what is really a repackaging of the very claim in question
Ex: “ that god exists is proved by scripture, b/c scripture is the word of god and thus cannot be false”, “Murder is morally wrong, so abortion is morally wrong”

Question 29

complex question

Answer 29

2+ questions asked in the guise of a single question.

Ex: asks if you’ve stopped cheating on tests. Yes/No would both suggest that they did cheat.

Question 30

vagueness

Answer 30

words/phrases can be interpreted within a range of possible meaning. fuzzy/imprecise.
Ex: “Susan will be home soon”, “Jose’s parents are rich”

Question 31

Ambiguity: Equivocation

Answer 31

word/phrases can be interpreted as having 2+ distinct meanings (not within range)
Ex: “Susan is cold” (her temp or personality?)

Question 32

Ambiguity: Amphiboly

Answer 32

When arguer misinterprets an ambiguous claim, and draw conclusion based upon this faulty interpretation.
Ex: “John told Henry he made a mistake” (which person made the mistake?)