TOPIC 2

Question 1

Critical thinking

Answer 1

ability to analyze and break down an issue in order to make a decision or find a solution

Question 2

starts with logic…

Answer 2

unnatural act of knowing which facts you’re putting together to reach your conclusions

Question 3

Critical thinking and Argumentation

Answer 3

• critical thinking is a strong skill for argumentation
• to arrive at a conclusion, critical thinking requires the capacity to assess the situation, scrutinize the evidence and consider multiple point of views

Question 4

Argumentation

Answer 4

• communication process in which someone tries to convince another to accept their opinion by presenting reasons and evidence
• the art of convincing and persuading a person to adopt a specific behaviour

Question 5

What does argumentation happen through?

Answer 5

Reason (showing facts, proving) - convincing
Emotion (non-verbal communication) - persuading

Question 6

Argument

Answer 6

set of statements arranged in such a way that the conclusion is demonstrated by the premises of the argument

Question 7

A group of claims is arranged as an argument when:

Answer 7

1- one of the claims (the “conclusion”) is treated as controversial (a claim to be defended)
2- one of the other claim(s) (the “premises”) are put forth as claims meant to support the conclusion

Question 8

Form of an argument (common conditional)

Answer 8

• If P then Q (conditional sentence)
• P (affirms the antecedent of premise 1)
  THEREFORE
• Q (is the consequent of premise 1)

Question 9

When is an argument valid

Answer 9

• When all the premises are true
• When the conclusion (consequent) follows from the premises (antecedent)

Question 10

Syllogism

Answer 10

• model of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two premises

Question 11

Types of syllogisms

Answer 11

Conditional: syllogism that neither affirms nor denies the premises
Disjunctive: syllogism formed by a premise that presents itself as an alternative
Dilemma: argumentative syllogism where two possible hypotheses are presented, none of which are desirable

Question 12

Conditional syllogism

Answer 12

Modus Ponens:
- If p then q, P, therefore Q
Modus Tollens:
- If p then q, not q, therefore not p

Question 13

Disjunctive syllogism

Answer 13

Modus Ponendo Tollens:
- Either p or q, P, therefore not Q
Modus Tollendo Ponens:
- Either p or q, not p, therefore q

Question 14

Dilemma

Answer 14

• problematic situation composed of two options that are contradictory to each other
• none of the options is satisfactory
• Or p, or q, if p, then r, if q, then r, in one way or another, r

Question 15

Fallacies

Answer 15

an argument is fallacious when the reasons given, appear to support the conclusion but, in reality, do not

Question 16

Affirming the consequent

Answer 16

If P then q, q, therefore P

Question 17

Denying the antecedent

Answer 17

If p, then q, not p, therefore not q

Question 18

Equivocation

Answer 18

the same word used with two different meanings (the word inhuman)

Question 19

Distorcion of facts

Answer 19

argument is falsified, presented in a partial way, or based on ad hoc evidence

Question 20

Straw man

Answer 20

author attacks an argument that is different from, usually weaker than, the opposition’s best argument

Question 21

Irrelevant conclusion

Answer 21

an argument that falsely proves one thing, and instead, proves a different conclusion (you must accept the new lease policy, we cannot continue to see people living on the street)

Question 22

False analogy

Answer 22

assumption that if two things are alike in one regard, they must be alike in other ways

Question 23

hasty generalization

Answer 23

The size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion

Question 24

Begging the question

Answer 24

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

Question 25

Argument from ignorance

Answer 25

assume that if something has not been proven false, it is therefore true, vice versa

Question 26

Attacking the person

Answer 26

the person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself

Question 27

Attacking the person: ad hominem

Answer 27

ad hominem (abusive): argument attacks the person who made the assertion ad hominem (circumstantial): author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances ad hominem (tu quoque): notes that the person does not practice what he preaches

Question 28

Argumentation: Preparatory System (Base structure of the argumentation process)

Answer 28

- main thesis should not be presented in the beginning of the argumentation process - prepare audience in advance to be open to what we have to say - the preparatory thesis is based on facts and presumptions

Question 29

Argumentation techniques: Compatibility/ Incompatibility

Answer 29

aim is to show that the preparatory thesis is consistent, or not, with the main thesis

Question 30

Argumentation techniques: Consequences technique

Answer 30

aim is to show the positive or negative consequences of a particular event (strikes: positive side, helps join forces and work towards a specific goal, negative side, jeapordizes the normal functioning of the affected services)

Question 31

Argumentation techniques: Conditional argument technique

Answer 31

aim is to defend an idea throughout a condition (strikes are always valid when they're peaceful, violence makes it worse)

Question 32

Argumentation techniques: Explanation technique

Answer 32

aim is to define concepts and prepare the ground for the argument to flow effectively

Question 33

Argumentation techniques: Examples technique

Answer 33

aim is to defend an idea through the use of an example

Question 34

Argumentation techniques: Comparison technique

Answer 34

aim is to defend an idea by comparing two or more things

Question 35

Argumentation techniques: Model/antimodel technique

Answer 35

aim is to defend an idea through a model or reference or through an antimodel, illuminating what should be avoided

Question 36

Argumentation techniques: Analogy technique

Answer 36

aim is to defend an idea through the use of analogies

Question 37

Argumentation techniques: Quantitative elements techniques

Answer 37

aim is to defend an idea using statistics

Question 38

Argumentation techniques: Citation technique

Answer 38

aim is to defend an idea using figures of reference (Socrates once said...)

Question 39

Argumentation techniques: Twisting technique

Answer 39

turning the adversary's arguments against him

Question 40

Argumentation techniques: Ridiculous technique

Answer 40

consists of creating an ironic situation that temporarily adapts to the adversary's argument, extracting from it all the conclusions, however absurd they may be

Question 41

Rhetoric

Answer 41

the art of persuasion and effective communication, involves use of techniques to persuade the audience such as presenting, using emotive language and creating an emotional connection with the audience

Question 42

Aristotle's rhetoric

Answer 42

1) Ethos: your audience has to trust you, and you must establish credibility through non-verbal communication 2) Pathos: you must appeal to your audience's emotion, and connect with them on an emotional level 3) Logos: use data, evidence, and facts to support your arguments - Enthymeme: conclusion deducted from premises - Example