Midterm

Question 0

"Denying the Consequent"
* If p, then q.
* Not q.
* Therefore, not p.
Valid

Answer 0

Modus Tollens

Question 1

"Affirming the antecedent"
* If p, then q.
* p.
* Therefore, q.
Valid

Answer 1

Modus Ponens

Question 3

• an argument with three lines– two of them premises, one of them the conclusion.
• If p, then q.
• If q, then r.
• Therefore, if p, then r.
  Valid

Answer 3

Hypothetical Syllogism

Question 4

• Either p or q.
• Not p.
• Therefore, q.
  or
• Either p or q.
• Not q.
• Therefore, p.
  Valid

Answer 4

Disjunctive Syllogism

Question 5

*FORMAL FALLACY
* If p,then q.
* Not p
* Therefore, not q.
INVALID

Answer 5

Denying the Antecedent

Question 6

• FORMAL FALLACY
• If p, then q.
• q.
• Therefore, p.
  INVALID

Answer 6

Affirming the Consequent

Question 7

• Argument intended to give conclusive proof
• Valid if the form of the argument makes it impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false
• Invalid if the conclusion could be false while the premises are true
• Soundness based on the truth of the premises

Answer 7

Deductive Argument

Question 8

• Give a conclusion that is probable from its premises
• Strong or Weak
• Cogent if the premises and conclusion are true

Answer 8

Inductive Argument

Question 9

The tendency to emphasize evidence that agrees with what we think already

Answer 9

Confirmation Bias

Question 10

• Errors in reasoning that cause one to come to untrue or uncritical conclusions
• Often they have appeal

Answer 10

Informal Fallacies

Question 11

• Qualities of Expertise:
• Education and Training
• Experience in the field
• Consensus in the field
• Reputation in the field
• Professional Accomplishments

Answer 11

Appeal to Authority

Question 12

• The assumption that previous outcomes of random events have an effect on subsequent events

Answer 12

Gambler’s Fallacy

Question 13

• Making a generalization from limited or psychologically accessible information
• Unrepresentative Sample

Answer 13

Hasty Generalization

Question 14

• Preferring information that is accessible or immediate over factual information

Answer 14

Availability Error

Question 15

• Arguing that a claim is true or false solely because of its origin

Answer 15

Genetic Fallacy

Question 16

• Infer that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole

Answer 16

Composition

Question 17

• The opposite of composition

* The assumption that what is true of the whole must be true of the parts

Answer 17

Division

Question 18

• involve merely insulting one’s opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but damning character flaws or actions

Answer 18

Abusive Ad Hominem (Appeal to the Person)

Question 19

• Pointing out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position

Answer 19

Circumstantial Ad Hominem

Question 20

• Charging hypocrisy to avoid making an argument or taking up someone else’s argument

Answer 20

Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

Question 21

• A key term or phrase in an argument is used one way in one portion of the argument and then another way in another portion of the argument.

Answer 21

Equivocation

Question 22

• Arguing that a claim must be true because of a number of people believe it

Answer 22

Appeal to Popularity

Question 23

• Someone proclaims his or her accuracy by noting that “this is how it’s always been done.”

Answer 23

Appeal to Tradition

Question 24

• Argue that your conclusion must be true, because there is no evidence against it. This fallacy wrongly shifts the burden of proof away from the one making the claim

Answer 24

Appeal to Ignorance

Question 25

• The arguer attempts to make their point using emotions rather than an argument

Answer 25

Appeal to Emotion

Question 26

• Deliberately raising points that have nothing to do with the argument in an attempt to confuse or muddy the argument

Answer 26

Red Herring

Question 27

• Picking apart a weak or distorted version of another’s claim instead of the actual or stronger version

Answer 27

Strawman

Question 28

• Justifying an action because of another person or actor’s wrong doing

Answer 28

Two Wrongs Fallacy

Question 29

• an argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.

Answer 29

Begging the Question

Question 30

• Asserting that there are only two options in a situation when there are actually more than two.
• Often used to force opponent into a corner

Answer 30

False Dilemma

Question 31

• Claiming that, because there is no clear line that there is distinction between things

Answer 31

Decision-Point Fallacy

Question 32

• Someone argues that something is the first step that makes several other steps follow when they don’t actually follow in an attempt to make the argument look foolish.

Answer 32

Slippery Slope

Question 33

• Arguing that because two things are similar in some respects, then they must be similar in all respects

Answer 33

Faulty Analogy