mid term

Question 1

Scare tactics

Answer 1

Emotional Argument
exaggerating possible dangers well beyond the possibility
ex.people who fear losing their jobs can be persuaded to fear that immigrants might work for less money

Question 2

EITHER OR CHOICES

Answer 2

• Emo
• reducing complicated options , with one that is obviously preferable
• ex.eat your broccoli or you wont get dessert

Question 3

Slippery Slope

Answer 3

• emo
• exaggerates the likely consequences of an action usually to frighten readers
• ex.

Question 4

overly sentimental appeals

Answer 4

• using excessively emotions to distract from the facts/make people feel guilty if they challenge the idea
• a kid holding a sign that wants gun control

Question 5

Bandwagon

Answer 5

-urge people to follow the same path everyone else is taking/rather than thinking independently

Question 6

Appeals to false authority

Answer 6

-occurs when writers offers themselves or authorities as sufficient warrant for believing a claim
(C-X is true bc i say so
W-what i say must be true
C-X is true bc Y says so
W-What Y says must be true)

Question 7

Dogmatism

Answer 7

a writer who asserts or assumes that a particular position is the only one that is conceivably acceptable

Question 8

Ad Hominem

Answer 8

• attack the character of a person rather than the claims he /she makes:when you destroy the credibility of your opponents you either destroy their credibility to preset reasonable appeals or distract from the successful arguments they may be offering
• tatics like this turn arguments into two sided affiars with good guys and bad guys

Question 9

Stacking the deck

Answer 9

showing only one side of the story-the one in their favor

ex.super size me

Question 10

Hasty Generalization

Answer 10

• an inference drawn from insufficient evidence
• based on stereotypes about people or instituitions
• ex.my honda is broke down , then all hondas must be junk

Question 11

Faulty Causality

Answer 11

• “After this, therefore because of this “
• the faulty assumption that because one event or action follows another, first causes the second
• ex.

Question 12

begging the question

Answer 12

-made on grounds that cant be accepted as the true bc those grounds themselves are in Q
-assuming as true the very claim thats disputed -a form of circularargument that goes nowhere
-ex.C-you cant give me a C
R-bc im A student
W-an A student is someone who cant recieves C’S

Question 13

Equivocation

Answer 13

half truths/based on trick langauge play

-

Question 14

Non sequiter

Answer 14

an arguement whose claims , reasons pr warrants dont connect logically
ex.you dont love me or youd buy me a bike

Question 15

straw man

Answer 15

attack an arguement that isnt really there, often a much weaker or more extreme one than the opponent is actually making
-an arguememt that is easy to knock dowm ,proceeds todo so and then claims victory over the oppenent whose real argument was quite different

Question 16

Red HERRING

Answer 16

it changes changes the subject abruptly to throw readers off the trial

Question 17

Fault analogy

Answer 17

innaccurate or inconsequential comparisons between objects or concepts.
-ways of understanding unfimaliar ideas by comparing them with something thats already known

Question 18

inartistic appeal

Answer 18

support for an arguement using facts, statistics , eyewitness testimony r other evidence the writer finds rathr than creates

Question 19

artistic appeal

Answer 19

support for an argument that a writer creates based on principles of reason and shared knowledge rather than on facts and on evidence
-common sense

Question 20

rogerian argument

Answer 20

1. intro:-writer describes an issue in terms rich enough to show he fully understands and respects any alternative positions may be valid
2. Contexts: writer describes the contexts in which alternative positions may be valid
3. Writers position: the writer states his position on the issue and presents the circumstances in which that opinion would be valid
4. Benefits to opponent: The writer explains to opponents how they would benefit from adopting his position

Question 21

ethos

Answer 21

writer establishes his credibility or authority

Question 22

logos

Answer 22

writer uses facts ,evidence and reason to make audience members accept a claim

Question 23

pathos

Answer 23

writer tries to generate specific emotions in the reader to dispose it and accept a claim