MIDTERM Flashcards

Question

Claims of Value

Answer 1

An argument over the appropriateness or value of something, expressing approval or disapproval EX) Donald Trump's hair is rad

Answer 2

Statements that try to persuade/assert a person should take a specific course of action, essentially arguing for a particular behavior or decision to be made. EX) You shouldn't go looking for aliens because you might get abducted

Answer 3

Support connects evidence to your claim strengthening your argument EX) Hillary collapsed after a memorial service. Some think she lacks the look and stamina to be president // Warrant stands between the claim and support. It is a belief or principle that is taken for granted. EX) Health concerns should be on of the first things we consider when choosing a president

Answer 4

Drawing an analogy to make something clearer. Doesn't necessarily prove your case, but it can be quite persuasive. EX) People are dependent on the government like a cat becomes dependent when adopted by humans, loosing a sense of independence and becoming out of touch with its natural survival skills

Answer 5

When we assume that because thing A came before thing B, thing A must have been caused by thing B EX) City concludes that sheep caused flooding. Once the sheep were removed from the canyon, the floods stopped. However, they didn't realize that the sheep hadn't directly caused the floods; it was the lack of vegetation that caused the floods, and the lack of vegetation was caused by overgrazing: sheep just happened to be the over-grazers-- but it could have been any grass eater.

Answer 6

First, proximity in time and space // Second, ability to repeat results // Third, ability to isolate results // Fourth, clarity of the explanation // Fifth, ability to reason by analogy from a similar situation where the causes are known

Answer 7

experiencing pain recently after a car crash

Answer 8

getting regular migraines + lack of good sleep = cause of regular migraines

Answer 9

struggling to understand why so and so broke up with you, then you remember one factor that stands out amongst all the other possible factors

Answer 10

the more straight forward and simple an argument is the more likely it's reasonable or true

Answer 11

Just like an employee who comes to work late on a consistent basis will lose their job so will a student who comes late to class on a consistent basis will lose a good grade.

Answer 12

The two go hand in hand. Causal Logic allows involves one thing happening first, another thing follows (it may be seconds later, days later, or years later) and we assume that the first thing caused the second thing. EX) Professor Bean questioning if Jim's crazy ideas about women caused his divorce ( Jim had strange ideas FIRST and then the divorce happened SECOND. + A came before B)

Answer 13

Necessary Causes // Contributory Causes // Sufficient Causes

Answer 14

must be present for an event to occur but is not solely responsible for it. EX) Watering a houseplant is necessary for the plant to live. Water is necessary for the life of the plant--along with other factors, but water is a must.

Answer 15

Helps bring an event about but cannot by itself produce an effect. EX) High winds may intensify a wildfire, but high winds cannot start a wildfire. Indeed, a wildfire may occur without any wind at all.

Answer 16

Can bring about an event all by itself EX) If you take a dose of cyanide, you will die. Cyanide is sufficient to kill you all by itself; no other ingredient is required.

Answer 17

Just because two things happen at the same time or at about the same time, the first doesn't necessarily cause the second EX) Eating ice cream causes shark attacks (whenever ice cream sales rise, so do shark attacks... but they're completely unrelated)

Answer 18

The assumption that one thing caused another to happen when there is no linkage between the two. EX) Basketball player doesn't make as many shots as usual, comes home to find he left his lucky rabbit foot, and associates that with why he didn't make as many shots.

Answer 19

1) reasoning by analogy 2) causal reasoning 3) inductive reasoning 4) deductive reasoning

Answer 20

Works by observing specific instances and then drawing a general conclusion. EX) To properly kill a zombie, shoot it in the head. (In zombie movies protagonists will shoot zombies in other areas, failing to kill them at first, but when they shoot them in the head they die instantly)

Answer 21

Begins with a general proposition (a premise or truth) and applies it to a specific instance. EX) Professor Bean has twenty students. They hand in an assignment. One assignment doesn't have a name on it. He starts with the general principle that the missing name must be one of the twenty students. He takes the specific step of examining the nineteen papers with names and concludes that the paper without the name is Gabrielle Morgan because hers was the only missing name.

Answer 22

A form of deductive reasoning. If it were broken down into a math problem it would look like this: A major premise + a minor premise = conclusion EX) Friend 1) How's Professor blah? Friend 2) Professor blah is terrible! Friend 1) Why? Friend 2) Well, he's always going off on tangents > Major premise: Good teachers don't go off on tangents > Minor Premise: Professor Jones goes off on tangents > Conclusion: Professor Jones is a bad professor

Answer 23

The many ways in which logic can go wrong. Logic can be used, but it can also be abused. Sometimes people abusing logic have no idea they're doing so. Ad Hominem // Ad Populum // Appeal from Ignorance // Circular Reasoning // Dicto Simpliciter // Either or Fallacy // False Analogy // Faulty Emotional Appeals // Irrelevant Emotional Appeal // Manipulative Emotional Appeal // Hasty Generalization // Improper Appeal to Authority // Non Sequitur // Poisoning the Well // Post Hoc Fallacy // Red Herring // Slippery Slope // Spotlight Fallacy // Stereotyping // Straw Man //

Answer 24

Latin for "against the man" The writer attacks the person rather than explaining why her position is faulty EX) I was going to go into detail of how wrong your stance is with plentiful examples and rehash what others have already commented. This is pointless because you are a moron. The United States will be a better place when people like you disappear. Sure you have the right to believe what you do but it would be hypocritical to not allow others the same respect. You are an idiot, enough said.

Answer 25

Latin for "appeal to the people" The assertion that because so many people believe something is true, it must be true. EX) Jesus must have been resurrected because 77% of Americans believe so

Answer 26

Arguing that something must be true because you can't prove it's not, or something isn't true because you can't prove that it is. EX) How can I possibly prove it doesn't exist? Do you expect me to get hold of all the pebbles in the world and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything's real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody's proved it doesn't exist!

Answer 27

Where your premise and conclusion are the same EX) R-rated movies are bad because they're bad

Answer 28

Latin for "from a maxim without qualification" The fallacy of not leaving room for any exception. EX) I don't care who you are, everyone would benefit from twenty minutes of vigorous exercise a day.

Answer 29

Also known as the false dilemma. It's a false choice between two options and only two options; all other potential choices are ignored EX) Either the system is favoring white men, or women and minorities are just dumber

Answer 30

Compares situations that are more unlike than alike. The passive reader may not realize that the analogy is false and therefore accepts bad logic. EX) Comparing the Repulicans to a five-year-old who refuses to get his way

Answer 31

Human beings are emotional creatures. As long as the emotional appeal is not irrelevant of manipulative It's okay to use emotion to persuade someone. When we see a disaster or starvation or sickness, we usually respond emotionally-- rarely do we respond with pure logic.

Answer 32

Trying to sway the argument by invoking emotions that are completely unrelated to the topic at hand EX) Head of IRS is in trouble for targeting enemies of President Obama. She claimed that she was only doing her job, but refused to testify in front of congressional hearing on the matter. Then, a sympathetic story about her troubles was written, explaining how she went to help with Hurricane Katrina, going from door to door to save some of the 50,000 stranded animals. (The two are completely unrelated)

Answer 33

Tries to deprive you of your free agency. It is so overwhelming in its emotional power that you cannot think clearly. You are meant to simply follow the emotion thoughtlessly. EX) Street theater performed by the animal rights group, displaying humans being decked out like a piece of meat in the grocery store.

Answer 34

Rather than coming to a conclusion after examining sufficient evidence, you jump to a conclusion after reviewing one or two bits of information. EX) Guy generalizes out from one comment on the internet to all Americans. Guy assumes that because one American has qualms about viewing sex and nudity, all Americans must have qualms about sex and nudity.

Answer 35

When a person who has no credibility in a certain area attempts to use his or her star power to convince us of something. EX) Ted Bundy condemning pornography (Trying to promote himself as innocent by hiding behind his own crimes)

Answer 36

Latin for "it does not follow" A conclusion that cannot derive logically from its premise. May often appear comical because it leaves you scratching your head asking, "What the heck?" EX) Do the Dew. There's no real meaning behind the phrase. You can drink Mountain Dew, but how do you "do it". The advertisement is not trying to make you think about it. They just want you to accept that Mountain Dew is cool, so you'll buy it.

Answer 37

Similar to Ad Hominem; indeed, it could be seen as a subtype of the ad hominem. But whereas an Ad Hominem is a general attack on a person's character (an attempt to distract from the issue) poisoning the well is an attempt to give the audience prejudicial information about an opponent so that everything he says there-after is tainted. EX) All I need to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11 (Poisons the well against Islam and Muslims. Basic message of man's sign is that Muslims are terrorists, so why should I listen to anything they have to say?)

Answer 38

Latin for "after this, therefore because of this." It's the assumption that because B happens after A, A must have caused B. EX) Blessed with $46,000.00 after using prayer rug.

Answer 39

An attempt to distract your audience from the issue at hand. EX) Trumps response to embarrassing footage of him being leaked to the press: "Yes, I'm very embarrassed by it. I hate it. But it's locker room talk, and it's one of those things. I will knock the hell out of ISIS. ISIS happened a number of years ago in a vacuum that was left because of bad judgement. And I will tell you, I will take care of ISIS" (There is no transition between his reaction to the footage and ISIS. He's deflecting from the uncomfortable subject and moves to one he'd rather talk about)

Answer 40

The assertion that because one negative thing happens, a whole host of negative things will follow in its wake. EX) Barney getting upset about gum wrappers saying it's only a matter of time before there's mounds of paper pages, newspapers, tin cans, and then rubbish. Then, that will escalate to slums and crime.

Answer 41

Occurs when we draw conclusions based on the media's skewed coverage EX) Suggesting that Israel isn't a safe place to visit because of all the negative news coverage on it. People may have been persuaded into believing that Israel is in a constant state of war, with terrorists blowing up buses and bombing restaurants. However, Professor Bean explains how he's been to Israel and expresses how he'd rather live there than certain places in America.

Answer 42

A type of hasty generalization involving people, places, genders, ethnicities, religions, etc. It's drawing a conclusion about a group of people based on a very small amount of evidence. EX) If you're from Africa, why are you white?

Answer 43

When you create a parody of your opponents argument, and then you argue against the parody of the argument rather than the real thing. EX) Obama says: The one unifying principle in the Republican Party at the moment is making sure that 30 million don't have health care.