Exam Q's he gave us

Question 1

1x Argument standardization (10 marks)

Answer 1

(premises, conclusion and diagram structure) (not a lot of noise, most challenging thing = the diagram (A#2))

Question 2

Short Answer section of questions (40-50 marks)

Answer 2

• define questions
• list provide factors
• explain concepts

Question 3

(1/4) Argument Evaluation (40-50 marks)

Answer 3

• Inference to the best explanation argument (IBE argument):

Question 4

(2/4) Argument Evaluation

Answer 4

-Inductive Analogy:

Question 5

(3/4) Argument Evaluation

Answer 5

-Inductive Generalization: (from exercise in the book)

Question 6

(4/4) Argument Evaluation

Answer 6

-Deductive Inference: (from example in class)

Question 7

Define “complete argument”

Answer 7

• premises:
• sources: need to have good sources and reason behind the premises. Best if it’s valid and a sound argument. sources can be by observation, a priori or testimony. Common knowledge isn’t a good source.
• Logic/Inference
• sub conclusion.
• Conclusion

Question 8

Define “euphemism” and provde an example of one (2 marks)

Answer 8

polite words used to cover up what is truly meant. It covers up..

ex: passed away is a euphemism for dead.
ex: sanitary workers is a euphemism for garbage men.

Question 9

List the 5 criteria for a grad appeal to authority provided by instructor (5 marks)

Answer 9

Authority must:

1. credentials
2. conclusion must be relevant
3. General Acceptance
4. No illegitimate bias (Dr. Death)
5. Falsifiable

Question 10

4 properties of Deductive Inference

Answer 10

1. Non ampletive
2. All or nothing
3. Truth preserving (premises are all true so conclusion is 100% true)
4. Erosion proof (Acceptable premises and conclusions is entailed by the langue. no additional evidence that can change strength of the conclusion)

Question 11

4 properties of an Inductive Inference

Answer 11

1. Ampletive
2. Comes in degrees of confidence
3. Not truth preserving (premises can be all true but conclusion can still be false)
4. Erodible by future evidence (all the ravens I’ve seen are black. so all ravens are black. (white raven can come along in future))

Question 12

Explain why “common knowledge” is inadequate as a condition of premise acceptability (2 marks)

Answer 12

1. It reduces to other more basic categories of evidence

2. Knowledge depends on greatly upon context (background, location, culture etc)

Question 13

Explain what “follows from” means in a deductive inference and in an inductive inference (4 marks)

Answer 13

Deductive Inference: “follow from” means that the content of the conclusion (what it is saying) does not go beyond of it’s premises.

Inductive Inference: “follows from” the conclusion is probably/likely given the evidence of the premises.

Question 14

Can and inductive valid conclusion be a weak argument? Explain (4 marks)

Answer 14

No. Inductively valid means that it is a strong argument. not weak. The argument therefore needs acceptable premises. The evidence that establishes a conclusion is probable.

Question 15

Explain why red herring and straw man fallacy are examples of Contextual Irrelevance (6 marks)

Answer 15

Contextual Irrelevance: is how the argument doesn’t address the main topic that’s being debated.

red herring: arguer introduces a different topic that is irrelevant to the main topic that is being disputed.

Straw man: arguer presents someone’s claim as a weaker version. He then attacks the weaker version but thinking he’s attacked the original claim. It’s contextual irrelevance because the context is the opponents ACTUAL argument.