Logic Exam 1

Question 1

Identify the three central laws of logic

Answer 1

Law of the Excluded Middle: There is no middle ground to true or false.
Law of Identity: If a statement is true, it is true.
Law of Non-Contradiction: A statement cannot be both true and false (in the same way, at the same time).

Question 2

Know the differences between deductive and inductive arguments

Answer 2

Deductive: a specific conclusion is reached from general statements/premises (top-down)
Inductive: a general conclusion is reached from specific statements/premises. (bottom-up)

Question 3

Be able to identify premises and conclusions

Answer 3

Conclusion: non-contradicting, indicative statements (statements which must be either true or false) of what you are seeking to prove (60)
Premises: non-contradicting, indicative statements of the reasons for coming to that conclusion. (60)

Question 4

Identify: modus ponens (way of affirming)

Answer 4

If P, then Q.
P.
Therefore Q.

Question 5

Identify: modus tollens (way of denying)

Answer 5

If P, then Q.
Not Q.
Therefore not P.

Question 6

Identify: hypothetical syllogism

Answer 6

syllogisms with hypotheticals/if-thens, therefore. A valid argument form which is a syllogism having a conditional statement for one or both of its premises.
Valid examples: modus ponens, modus tollens
Invalid examples: affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent

Question 7

Identify: ad hominem

Answer 7

Attacking or praising the people who make an argument rather than discussing the argument itself. (Argument to the Man)

Question 8

Identify: ad populum

Answer 8

Using an appeal to popular assent/the masses, often by arousing the feelings and enthusiasm of the multitude as a mere multitude rather than building an argument. (Argument to the People)

Question 9

Identify: affirming the consequent

Answer 9

If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore P.

Question 10

Identify: denying the antecedent

Answer 10

If P, then Q.
Not P.
Therefore not Q

Question 11

Identify: Bulverism (genetic fallacy)

Answer 11

the claim that an idea, product, or person is assumed to be wrong, then the origin of the claimant’s claim is attacked

Question 12

Identify: begging the question (Circular Reasoning)

Answer 12

Writers assume as evidence for their argument the very conclusion they are attempting to prove. Assuming what needs proving.

Question 13

Idenify: post hoc (after this)

Answer 13

the assumption that because one event is preceded by the second event, it must mean that the first event must have caused the second event. (After this, therefore because of this). where chronological priority is the only real reason given for the assumed casual relationship.

Question 14

Identify: either/or fallacy

Answer 14

he assumption that there are only two choices or possible outcomes when actually there are several. (Excluded Middle)

Question 15

Identify: strawman

Answer 15

where a speaker sets up his opposition in an unfair way (not held by the opposition), so that it is easy to take down.

Question 16

Identify: ipse dixit (he has said it himself)

Answer 16

an illegitimate appeal made to authority

Question 17

Identify: Ad baculum

Answer 17

an appeal to “the stick.” (appealing to forceful acceptance)

Question 18

Identify: Tu quoque

Answer 18

A “you too” argument

Question 19

Identify: Ad ignoratium

Answer 19

appeals to lack of information, an argument from silence

Question 20

Identify: Chronological snobbery

Answer 20

argument rejected from something’s newness or oldness

Question 21

Identify: Fallacy of equivocation

Answer 21

when one of the terms in the argument/mid-argument has more than one meaning, with a pretense that such has not been done.

Question 22

Identify: Fallacy of accent

Answer 22

a sentence’s shift in meaning due to simple differentiation in italics/emphasis

Question 23

Identify: Fallacy of selective arrangement

Answer 23

statements made to invite conclusions less than accurate

Question 24

Identify: Fallacy of amphiboly

Answer 24

where a sentence, taken as a whole, is ambiguous.

Question 25

Identify: Fallacy of composition

Answer 25

when someone thinks that whatever is true of parts must be true of the whole.

Question 26

Identify: Fallacy of division

Answer 26

the opposite of the previous fallacy; anything that is true of the whole must be true of its parts.

Question 27

Identify: Apriorism

Answer 27

a hasty generalization