SSH

Question 1

What is an assertion?

Answer 1

A declarative sentence that is intended to make a claim of some sort. Sometimes these are called statements or propositions

Question 2

What is a premise?

Answer 2

It is a statement that is offered in support of a conclusion

Question 3

What is a conclusion?

Answer 3

It is a statement that is held to be supported by a premise or premises.

Question 4

What are the common impediments to critical thinking?

Answer 4

Category 1: Hindrances that arise because of how we think.
Category 2: Hindrances that occur because of what we think.

Question 5

Category 1 Impediments to Critical Thinking
(a) Self-Interested thinking:

Answer 5

Self-Interested thinking: Accepting a claim solely on the
grounds that it advances, or coincides with, our interests.

Question 6

Category 1 Impediments to Critical Thinking
b) Group Thinking:

Answer 6

Peer pressure
Fallacy: an argument form that is both common and defective.
* Fallacy of appeal to popularity/appeal to the masses
* Fallacy of appeal to common practice
* Fallacy of appeal to tradition
* Genetic fallacy

Question 7

Category 2 Impediments to Critical Thinking

What are the 3 key ingredients in propositional knowledge?

Answer 7

Propositional knowledge (knowledge-that) “Thomas knows that Canada is a parliamentary democracy.”
In this course, our central concern is with Propositional Knowledge
3 key ingredients in propositional knowledge:
1. Belief – To know that p you must believe p.
2. Truth – To know that p, your belief that p needs to be true.
3. Justification – To know that p, your true belief that p must to justified

Question 8

What is realtivism?

Answer 8

The view that propositions have a truth- value, but that what
this is depends upon (i.e. is relative to) some person or social group.

Question 9

Subjective Relativism (The Subjectivist Fallacy)

Answer 9

The view that the truth-value of a proposition depends solely upon what
someone believes

Question 10

Social Relativism

Answer 10

The view that the truth-value of a proposition depends solely upon (is relative to)
societies or groups

Question 11

Subjectivist fallacy

Answer 11

Accepting the notion of
subjective relativism or using
it to try to support a claim.

Question 12

Deductive argument

Answer 12

An argument intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion.

Question 13

Inductive argument

Answer 13

An argument in which the premises are intended to provide probable, not conclusive,
support for its conclusion

Question 14

When does a deductive argument valid

Answer 14

It succeeds when its provides such decisive logical support and invalid when it fails to provide it.

Question 15

what makes a inductive argument strong?

Answer 15

An inductive argument that succeeds in providing probable—but not conclusive—
logical support for its conclusion is said to be strong.
* An inductive argument that fails to provide such support is said to be weak

Question 16

why are inductive arguments not truth-perserving?

Answer 16

the truth of the conclusion, can not be guaranteed by the truth of the premises.

Question 17

Deductive validity

Answer 17

An argument is deductively valid if and only if it is not
possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
false
i.e., if all the premises were true, the conclusion would
have to be true too.
An argument is deductively invalid if and only if it is not
deductively valid.

Question 18

Deductive soundness

Answer 18

An argument is said to be deductively sound if and only
if (1) it is deductively valid and (2)all its premises are
true

Question 19

Inductive strength

Answer 19

An argument is inductively strong if and only if the
conclusion is probably true, assuming the premises are true.
An argument is inductively weak if and only if it is not
inductively strong

Question 20

Not all deductively valid arguments have true premises and
true conclusions.
* In fact, a valid argument may have any of the following
combinations

Answer 20

1. True premises and true conclusion
2. False premises and true conclusion
3. False premises and false conclusion

Question 21

Two Types of Conflict:

Answer 21

2 statements can be inconsistent – i.e. can’t both be true, but
could both be false. E.g. “Today is Monday” and “Today is
Wednesday” are inconsistent.
* 2 statements can be contradictories - i.e. can’t both be true, but
(also) can’t both be false. E.g. “There is a Covid-19 virus” and
“There is not a Covid-19 virus” are contradictories

Question 22

What is a fallacy?

Answer 22

It is a faulty pattern of inference because the premises don’t provide adequate support for the conclusion

Question 23

Irrelevant premises

Answer 23

irrelevant premises have no bearing on the truth of the conclusion

Question 24

unacceptable premises

Answer 24

unacceptable premises may be relevant to the truth of the conclusion, but are dubious for other reasons

Question 25

Conditional Statements

Answer 25

A conditional statement is a statement of the form
If p, then q.
Examples:
* If it rains, then the picnic will be cancelled.
* If Jones didn’t commit the murder, the butler did.

Question 26

Conditionals are compound statements composed of two parts:

Answer 26

• The antecedent – what follows the word “if”
• The consequent – what follows the word “then”

Question 27

Disjunctive Statements

Answer 27

A disjunctive statement is a statement of the form
Either p or q

Question 28

What are some valid conditional argument patterns?

Answer 28

Affirming the antecedent
Denying the consequent
Hypothetical syllogism

Question 29

What is a valid disjunctive pattern?

Answer 29

Disjunctive syllogism

Question 30

What are some invalid conditional argument patterns

Answer 30

Denying the Antecedent
Affirming the Consequent

Question 31

The genetic fallacy

Answer 31

The fallacy of relevance
Arguing or assuming that a claim is true or false solely because of its orgin.

Question 32

The fallacy of composition

Answer 32

The fallacy of relevance
Arguing or assuming that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole.

Question 33

The fallacy of division

Answer 33

The fallacy of relevance
Arguing or assuming that what’s true of the whole must be equally true of the parts.

Question 34

The fallacy of appeal to person (ad hominem fallacy)

Answer 34

The fallacy of relevance
Arguing that we should reject a claim solely because of the person who made it

Question 35

Three types of ad hominem fallacy

Answer 35

Character- attack on the person
Circumstance-Points on the person’s circumstances
Tu Quoque- Claiming the person is hyprocritcal and the claim is inconsistent with something else.

Question 36

The fallacy of Equivocation

Answer 36

When a word or expression Is used in two different senses in an argument . Typically, one premise uses the word in one way, and another premise uses the word in a different way.

Question 37

The appeal to popularity

Answer 37

Arguing that a claim must be true simply because it is a popular belief

Question 38

The appeal to common practice

Answer 38

Arguing that someone should be done a certain way simply it Is commonly done that way.

Question 39

Appeal to tradition

Answer 39

Arguing that a claim must be true simply because it is part of a tradition.

Question 40

Appeal to ignorance

Answer 40

An argument which states or assumes a claim like this:” we don’t know that p is true , therefore p is false”

Question 41

Appeal to emotion

Answer 41

This fallacy occurs when emotions(guilt, anger,pity) are appealed to, instead of relevant reasons in a argument

Question 42

Red Herring

Answer 42

This fallacy occurs when irrelevant factors are introduced during a argument.

Question 43

The fallacy of begging the question

Answer 43

Attempting to prove a conclusion by using that same conclusion as a premise. (Sometimes the
conclusion is worded differently when it is used as a premise, and sometimes it is implici

Question 44

The fallacy of false dilemma

Answer 44

The fallacy of false dichotomy occurs when the premise(s) claim or assume that a choice between two
alternatives is exhaustive or exclusive or both, when the choice is not.

Question 45

The Slippery Slope Fallacy

Answer 45

This occurs when an argument claims or assumes that taking a particular step will inevitably lead to a further,
undesirable step or step

Question 46

The Fallacy of Hasty Generalization

Answer 46

When an argument concludes something about a group or set on the basis of an inadequate
sample size

Question 47

The Fallacy of Faulty Analogy

Answer 47

We often reason by analogy: by comparing one thing to another.
Specifically: we conclude something about the target by comparing it to the analogue
An argument commits the fallacy of faulty analogy when the analogue fails to be both relevantly-
similar and sufficiently-similar to the target

Question 48

Simple Statement

Answer 48

Contains no other statement as a component part. (We
represent it with a letter, like “P”

Question 49

Complex Statement

Answer 49

Contains at least one other statement as a component part

Question 50

Logical Operator

Answer 50

special expressions which work to combine simple statements
into complex ones: AND, OR, IF…THEN, NO