1.Blake lives in Hawaii, so she must spend her weekends surfing. Which two statements accurately summarize the argument? Choose 2 answers.
- The argument includes a single premise.
- The argument would need to be mapped using a tree diagram.
- The argument includes conjoint support.
- The argument includes a single conclusion.
Explanation:
The statement "Blake lives in Hawaii, so she must spend her weekends surfing" consists of one premise ("Blake lives in Hawaii") and one conclusion ("she must spend her weekends surfing"). It’s a simple argument with no conjoint support (multiple premises working together) and doesn’t require a tree diagram for mapping, as it’s a straightforward single-premise argument.
2.Which component of an argument has the potential to be classified as true or false?
- Inference
- Sentence
- Proposition
- Evidence
Explanation:
A proposition is a statement that expresses a complete thought and can be evaluated as true or false (e.g., "The sky is blue"). In the context of an argument, propositions are the building blocks that form premises and conclusions.
- Which of the following is an example of a complex proposition?
- Elephants are heavy.
- Humans are mammals.
- The Sun is either a star or a planet.
- The sky is blue.
Explanation:
A complex proposition is a statement that combines two or more simple propositions using logical connectives like "and," "or," or "if...then." In this case, "The Sun is either a star or a planet" is a complex proposition because it combines two simple propositions ("The Sun is a star" and "The Sun is a planet") with the logical connective "or." The other options are simple propositions, as they each express a single idea without logical connectives.
4.Which part of an argument is deduced or justified?
- Inference
- Conclusion
- Missing Premise
- Premise
Explanation:
In an argument, the conclusion is the statement that is deduced or justified based on the premises. The premises are the supporting statements or evidence, and the conclusion is the claim that follows logically from them. For example, in the argument "All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore, Socrates is mortal," the conclusion ("Socrates is mortal") is deduced from the premises.
5.Which is an example of exhortation?
- Go to school and study hard.
- How many moons does Jupiter have?
- Let’s finish our work quickly!
- I am ending this meeting now.
Explanation:
Exhortation refers to a statement that urges or encourages someone to take action, often with a motivational or persuasive tone. "Let’s finish our work quickly!" fits this definition because it encourages the group to act (finish work) with a sense of urgency. "Go to school and study hard" is a command, not necessarily an exhortation, as it lacks the motivational tone. The other options are either a question or a statement of action, not an encouragement.
6.All bears are wild. Smokey is a bear. Therefore, Smokey is wild. Which term describes this argument?
- Abductive
- Deductive
- Inductive
- Invalid
Explanation:
A deductive argument is one where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, assuming they are true. In this case, the argument follows a classic deductive structure: a general premise ("All bears are wild"), a specific premise ("Smokey is a bear"), and a conclusion that logically follows ("Smokey is wild"). This is a valid deductive argument. Inductive arguments generalize from specific observations, abductive arguments infer the best explanation, and "invalid" would apply if the conclusion didn’t logically follow, which isn’t the case here.
7.All birds have beaks. A woodpecker is a bird. Therefore, woodpeckers have a beak. What is the term used to represent this argument?
- Toulmin argument
- Deductive argument
- Inductive argument
- Rogerian argument
Explanation:
A deductive argument is one where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, assuming they are true. In this case, the argument follows a deductive structure: a general premise ("All birds have beaks"), a specific premise ("A woodpecker is a bird"), and a conclusion that logically follows ("Woodpeckers have a beak"). This is a valid deductive argument. An inductive argument generalizes from specific observations, a Toulmin argument is a specific model for structuring arguments, and a Rogerian argument focuses on finding common ground in debates—none of which apply here.
8.People with weak eyesight sometimes fall in areas with dim lighting. A person stumbles frequently. They may have weak eyesight. Which type of argument does the example qualify as?
- Deductive
- Inferential
- Evaluative
- Deferential
Explanation:
The argument suggests a possible explanation for an observation: frequent stumbling might be due to weak eyesight, based on the premise that people with weak eyesight sometimes fall in dim lighting. This is an inferential argument, specifically an abductive one, where the conclusion is a plausible explanation (not a certain one) based on the evidence. It’s not deductive because the conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow (there could be other reasons for stumbling). Evaluative arguments assess value or quality, and deferential is not a standard type of argument in this context.
9.If I am tall, then I am fast. I am fast. Therefore, I am tall. Which type of logic error is this an example of?
- The fallacy fallacy
- Begging the question
- Affirming the consequent
- Denying the antecedent
Explanation:
The argument has the structure: "If P, then Q. Q is true. Therefore, P is true." This is a logical fallacy known as affirming the consequent. In this case, P is "I am tall," and Q is "I am fast." The premise states that being tall implies being fast, and since the person is fast, they conclude they must be tall. However, this is invalid because there could be other reasons for being fast besides being tall. The correct logical form (modus ponens) would be: "If P, then Q. P is true. Therefore, Q is true."
10.Which type of fallacy occurs when the conclusion of the argument is wrong?
- Equivocation
- Red herring
- The fallacy-fallacy
- Straw man
Explanation:
The fallacy-fallacy occurs when someone assumes that because an argument contains a fallacy (a flaw in reasoning), its conclusion must be wrong. This is not necessarily true—a conclusion can still be correct even if the argument supporting it is flawed. For example, if someone uses a fallacious argument to claim "2 + 2 = 4," the conclusion is still true despite the bad reasoning.
10.Which type of fallacy occurs when the conclusion of the argument is wrong?
- Equivocation
- Red herring
- The fallacy-fallacy
- Straw Man
Explanation:
The fallacy-fallacy occurs when someone assumes that because an argument contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. This question is asking about a fallacy related to the conclusion being wrong due to the argument’s structure. Equivocation involves ambiguous language, a red herring distracts from the issue, and a straw man misrepresents an opponent’s argument—none of these directly address the conclusion being wrong due to a fallacy in the argument itself.
11.Which fallacy occurs when an erroneous conclusion is drawn from a conditional statement and the assertion, as a separate premise, is the consequent of the conditional?
- Begging the question
- Affirming the consequent
- Appeal to Unqualified Authority
- Burden of proof
Explanation:
Affirming the consequent is a logical fallacy where a conditional statement (if P, then Q) is followed by the assertion of Q (the consequent), leading to the erroneous conclusion that P must be true. For example, "If it’s raining, the ground is wet. The ground is wet, so it must be raining." This doesn’t account for other reasons the ground might be wet.
13.If I am a scientist, then I am intelligent. I am not a scientist. Therefore, I am not intelligent. Which type of logic error is this an example of?
- Begging the question
- Affirming the consequent
- The fallacy fallacy
- Denying the antecedent
Explanation:
The argument has the structure: "If P, then Q. Not P, therefore not Q." This is denying the antecedent, a formal fallacy. In this case, "If I am a scientist (P), then I am intelligent (Q). I am not a scientist (not P), therefore I am not intelligent (not Q)." This is invalid because there could be other reasons for being intelligent besides being a scientist.
12."The ultimate benefit for a person is happiness. As it is superior over all other values." Which type of fallacy is occurring in the above-given scenario?
- Begging the question
- Masked man
- Burden of proof
- Slippery slope
Explanation:
Begging the question occurs when an argument assumes the truth of its conclusion within its premises, essentially arguing in a circle. In this scenario, the statement "The ultimate benefit for a person is happiness. As it is superior over all other values" assumes that happiness is the ultimate benefit because it is superior, without providing independent evidence for why it is superior. This circular reasoning is a classic example of begging the question.
14.In which ways can a news outlet bolster its reputation as being credible?
- By allowing readers to make comments on online articles
- By remaining fervently committed to its ideological viewpoint
- By issuing a correction and an apology for incorrect information it published
- By attaching author bios to every published article
Explanation:
A news outlet can bolster its credibility by demonstrating accountability and transparency, such as by issuing corrections and apologies when it publishes incorrect information. This shows a commitment to accuracy and trustworthiness, which are key to credibility. Allowing comments can foster engagement but doesn’t directly enhance credibility. Remaining committed to an ideological viewpoint can suggest bias, undermining credibility. Attaching author bios can provide transparency but doesn’t directly address the outlet’s overall reputation for accuracy.
15.Which two questions should be asked when assessing the credibility of an online information source? Choose 2 answers.
- Who is behind the information?
- Does the site appear official and professionally designed?
- Does the site publish such information regularly?
- What is the evidence for the claims being made?
Explanation:
When assessing the credibility of an online information source, two critical questions are: "Who is behind the information?" (to evaluate the source’s authority, expertise, and potential bias) and "What is the evidence for the claims being made?" (to ensure the claims are supported by reliable data or reasoning). These questions directly address the trustworthiness and reliability of the source.
16.An information source states that it is the only source of real information and that other sources cannot be trusted. What does this suggest in regard to the source’s credibility?
- The source is independent and therefore reliable.
- The source lacks credibility.
- The source is concerned with telling the true story rather than fake news.
- The source has a unique perspective that is more accurate and reliable than others.
Explanation:
A source claiming to be the only trustworthy source while dismissing all others is a red flag for credibility. This behavior suggests bias, lack of transparency, and an attempt to suppress alternative perspectives, which are hallmarks of an untrustworthy source. Credible sources typically provide evidence, acknowledge other viewpoints, and don’t rely on self-proclamation of reliability.
18.What is confirmation bias?
- The effort to interpret others’ reasoning in the best possible light to debate on the merits of an argument and avoid fallacies
- A self-reflective process in which an individual challenges their own beliefs to ensure they are correct and avoid fallacies
- The natural tendency to seek evidence that challenges personal beliefs and ignore evidence that gets in the way of those beliefs
- The rational way to think about a solution based on reason and evidence
Explanation:
This option is incorrectly worded in the question—it should say the opposite to accurately define confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek evidence that *supports* personal beliefs and ignore evidence that contradicts them. For example, if someone believes a certain diet is the best, they might only look for studies that praise it while ignoring those that show its flaws.
19.A train running a short distance rarely checks its passengers for tickets. As a result, individual A does not purchase a ticket when riding the train. One day, all passengers are checked, and individual A is fined. What led individual A to not purchase a ticket the day they were fined?
- Cognitive Bias
- Heuristics
- Irrationality
- Bounded Rationality
Explanation:
Individual A likely used a heuristic—a mental shortcut—based on the observation that tickets are rarely checked, leading them to assume they wouldn’t be checked and thus not buy a ticket. Heuristics are rules of thumb that simplify decision-making but can lead to errors. Cognitive bias is a broader term and less specific here, irrationality implies a lack of logical reasoning (not necessarily the case), and bounded rationality refers to decision-making within constraints but doesn’t directly explain the reliance on past patterns like heuristics does.
20.Climate scientists argue that climate is changing. Executives at Company X argue that climate is stable. A worker at Company X tells their friends climate is stable, arguing that this must be true because their boss said so. Which fallacy is described in the given scenario?
- Fallacy of equivocation
- Straw figure fallacy
- Ad hominem fallacy
- Appeal to authority fallacy
Explanation:
The appeal to authority fallacy occurs when someone claims a statement is true simply because an authority figure (who may not be an expert in the relevant field) says so, without providing evidence. In this scenario, the worker argues that the climate is stable because their boss (an executive at Company X) said so, relying on the boss’s authority rather than evidence. The boss is not a climate expert, so this is an inappropriate appeal to authority.
21.Approximately 25% of the population believes X is a hoax, therefore, there must be some truth to the statement that X is a hoax." Which fallacy is committed in the given statement?
- The fallacy of equivocation
- Appeal to force fallacy
- Ad hominem fallacy
- Appeal to popularity fallacy
Explanation:
The appeal to popularity fallacy (also known as argumentum ad populum) occurs when an argument claims that something must be true because many people believe it. In this case, the statement argues that because 25% of the population believes X is a hoax, there must be some truth to that belief. However, the popularity of a belief does not determine its truth—truth depends on evidence, not the number of believers.
22.What is the genetic fallacy?
- It is an irrelevant fallacy based solely on history or origin.
- It is committed when one’s argument mistakenly uses the same word in two different senses.
- It is committed when one introduces an irrelevant topic.
- It is committed when one attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument itself.
Explanation:
The genetic fallacy occurs when an argument is judged based on its origin, history, or source rather than its actual merits. For example, dismissing a scientific theory because it was proposed by someone with controversial views is a genetic fallacy. The other options describe different fallacies: using a word in two senses is equivocation, introducing an irrelevant topic is a red herring, and attacking the person is an ad hominem fallacy.
23.What is the fallacy of equivocation?
- It is committed when one appeals to an unqualified authority supporting one’s claim.
- It occurs when one uses ambiguous language to support or deny an argument.
- It is committed when one introduces an irrelevant topic.
- It is committed when one appeals to the popularity of a belief as a reason to affirm its truth.
Explanation:
The fallacy of equivocation happens when a word or phrase is used with different meanings in the same argument, leading to a misleading conclusion. For example, "A feather is light. Light things are not dark. Therefore, a feather is not dark." Here, "light" is used in two senses (weight and color), making the argument invalid. The other options describe different fallacies: appealing to an unqualified authority is an appeal to authority fallacy, introducing an irrelevant topic is a red herring, and appealing to popularity is the appeal to popularity fallacy.
24.A reporter asks politicians about the scandals their party is involved in, and one of the politicians replies, “Voters don’t care about that topic. They are focused on other issues, like how they will pay the rent this month or cover their medical bills.” The reporter comments that this is nothing but a “red herring.” What is a “red herring” as put by the reporter?
- It responds to a question with an answer irrelevant to the original question.
- It misrepresents another’s argument and then attacks the misrepresented argument rather than the actual argument.
- It critiques the origin of a claim or argument rather than the claim or argument itself.
- It uses the key term or phrase in an argument in an ambiguous way.
Explanation:
A red herring is a fallacy where someone introduces an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue. In this case, the politician avoids addressing the scandal by talking about voters’ concerns (rent and medical bills), which is unrelated to the question. This distraction tactic is a classic red herring. The other options describe different fallacies: misrepresentation is a strawman, critiquing the origin is a genetic fallacy, and using ambiguous terms is equivocation.
25.An individual wants to conduct an anonymous survey to determine what percentage of the population drinks alcohol daily, so the individual formulates the following survey question: "I drink alcohol excessively, often having at least one drink a day." Participants must select "true" or "false." Which statement is true of this study?
- It is good because it addresses the central issue in the study.
- It is not good because it fails to consider the participant’s motives.
- It is not good because the study is anonymous.
- It is not good because the question may lead participants to answer in a certain way.
Explanation:
The survey question is poorly designed because it includes a loaded statement ("I drink alcohol excessively") and defines "at least one drink a day" as excessive, which may bias participants’ responses due to social desirability or misinterpretation. This is known as a leading question, which can skew results.
26.What is an example of confirmation bias?
- Making judgments based on whichever examples come most readily to mind
- Ignoring evidence that undermines what is already believed and putting extra weight on evidence that confirms what is already believed
- Putting too much weight on the first information received when making further decisions
- Generalizing one sample’s statistics to a population that is not represented by that sample
Explanation:
Confirmation bias is the tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs while ignoring or downplaying contradictory evidence. The correct option directly describes this behavior. The other options describe different biases: the first is availability bias, the third is anchoring bias, and the fourth is a sampling bias or overgeneralization.
27.An employee receives a performance review that is generally positive and commends the employee’s many accomplishments. However, there is a short section in which opportunities for improvement are outlined. The employee is upset and filled with the overall performance rating. What type of bias is the employee demonstrating?
- Outcome bias
- Negativity bias
- Anchoring bias
- Confirmation bias
Explanation:
Negativity bias refers to the tendency to focus on negative information more than positive information, even when the positive outweighs the negative. Here, the employee fixates on the small section of criticism in an otherwise positive review, demonstrating negativity bias. Outcome bias involves judging a decision based on its outcome, anchoring bias involves over-relying on initial information, and confirmation bias involves seeking information that confirms existing beliefs—none of which apply here.
28.What is the principle of charity?
- Reducing the influence of confirmation bias
- General features of the way humans learn and process information
- Forming false beliefs
- Interpreting another person’s argument in the strongest terms possible
Explanation:
The principle of charity is a concept in philosophy and critical thinking where one interprets another person’s argument in the most reasonable and strongest possible way, even if the argument is poorly stated. This approach ensures a fair evaluation by addressing the best version of the argument rather than a weaker, misinterpreted version. ---
29.Which statement is correct about system 1 thinking?
- It is used to correct thought processes when necessary.
- It is heavily influenced by confirmation bias and availability bias.
- It is not subject to common cognitive biases.
- It is not influenced by any bias.
Explanation:
System 1 thinking, as described in cognitive psychology (e.g., by Daniel Kahneman), refers to fast, automatic, and intuitive thinking. It operates quickly but is prone to cognitive biases like confirmation bias (favoring information that supports existing beliefs) and availability bias (relying on readily available information).
30.What is the difference between confirmation bias and anchoring bias?
- Confirmation bias causes people to ignore evidence that undermines what they already believe. Anchoring bias causes people to put too much emphasis on the first piece of information they receive.
- Confirmation bias causes people to put too much emphasis on the first piece of information they receive. Anchoring bias causes people to make judgments based on whichever examples come most readily to mind.
- Confirmation bias causes people to put too much emphasis on the first piece of information they receive. Anchoring bias causes people to ignore evidence that undermines what they already believe.
Explanation:
Confirmation bias involves favoring information that aligns with existing beliefs and ignoring contradictory evidence. Anchoring bias occurs when individuals rely too heavily on the first piece of information they encounter (the "anchor") when making decisions. The correct option accurately distinguishes between the two. The other options mix up the definitions, incorrectly pairing the biases with the wrong behaviors.
31.Example: Certain members of a population are more likely to be asked to complete a survey than others. What type of bias does this example demonstrate?
- Confirmation bias
- Anchoring bias
- Availability bias
- Sampling bias
Explanation:
Sampling bias occurs when the sample selected for a study or survey is not representative of the population, often because certain members are more likely to be included than others. In this example, if certain members of a population are more likely to be asked to complete a survey, the sample is skewed, leading to sampling bias.
32.Which strategies help combat bias? Choose 2 answers.
- Listen to what a podcaster who shares one’s values has to say
- Use the representativeness heuristic
- Evaluate the point of view of news sources
- Choose recent, new information over conflicting older ideas
- Use the principle of charity when listening to an opposing point of view
Explanation:
To combat bias, one should actively seek to understand and evaluate different perspectives and interpret opposing views fairly. Evaluating the point of view of news sources helps identify potential biases in reporting, encouraging critical thinking. Using the principle of charity ensures that opposing arguments are interpreted in their strongest form, reducing the risk of straw man fallacies and promoting fair evaluation.
33.What does anchoring bias do?
- It causes people to put too much emphasis on the first piece of information they receive.
- It makes people judge a situation by comparing it to an existing prototype that they believe.
- It causes people to ignore evidence that undermines what they already believe.
- It causes people to make judgments based on whichever examples come most readily to mind.
Explanation:
Anchoring bias is a cognitive bias where individuals rely too heavily on the first piece of information they encounter (the "anchor") when making decisions. For example, if you’re negotiating a price and the first number mentioned is $1,000, that anchor might influence your perception of what’s reasonable, even if the actual value is much lower.
34.Which of the following employs the “principle of charity”?
- Considering another’s argument in the most solid terms
- Creating an initial interpretation based on the interpretation of another person
- Agreeing with a person’s interpretation to create a social bond
- Mistakenly misinterpreting the intentions of a person
Explanation:
The principle of charity involves interpreting someone else’s argument in the strongest, most reasonable way possible, even if it’s not presented well. “Considering another’s argument in the most solid terms” aligns with this by focusing on strengthening the argument for fair evaluation.
35.Which scenario demonstrates anchoring bias?
- If a car salesperson initially prices a car at $10,000, a buyer may think they’re getting a great deal when the price is lowered to $8,500, even though the car is actually worth $8,000.
- An individual who believes in ghosts reads articles about people who had experienced paranormal activity which strengthens their belief that ghosts are real.
- Although a student thought they had answered most of the questions correctly on an exam, they scored less than 60% several weeks afterwards.
- A voter’s ability to predict an election’s outcome is often exaggerated.
Explanation:
This scenario illustrates anchoring bias because the buyer’s perception of the car’s value is influenced by the initial price of $10,000 (the anchor). Even though the car is worth $8,000, the buyer feels they’re getting a good deal at $8,500 because they’re comparing it to the higher initial price.
36.What is a mental heuristic?
- Level II thinking
- A rule of thumb or a shortcut
- A strategy to avoid bias
- Considering all information to make the best decision
Explanation:
A mental heuristic is a cognitive shortcut or rule of thumb that simplifies decision-making by allowing people to make quick judgments without analyzing all available information. While heuristics can be useful, they often lead to biases because they oversimplify complex problems. The other options are incorrect: "Level II thinking" is not a standard term for heuristics, "a strategy to avoid bias" is the opposite of what heuristics often do (they can introduce bias), and "considering all information" describes a more thorough, non-heuristic approach.
37.An employee meets with his boss and claims a coworker is bullying him. The boss asks the employee for evidence to support his claims. He argues that it is the boss’s responsibility to prove he was not bullied and that he should not have to provide evidence. Which fallacy of presumption is reflected in this statement?
- Ad hominem
- Slippery slope
- Card stacking
- Burden of proof
Explanation:
The burden of proof fallacy occurs when someone making a claim shifts the responsibility of proving or disproving it onto someone else, rather than providing evidence for their own claim. In this scenario, the employee claims he is being bullied but argues that the boss must prove he wasn’t bullied, instead of providing evidence to support his own claim. This is a clear example of the burden of proof fallacy. ---
39.A political candidate is maligned by an opponent for having experimented with recreational drugs in college. Which fallacy of relevance is this an example of?
- Ad hominem attack
- Straw man
- Slippery slope
- Circular reasoning
Explanation:
An ad hominem attack occurs when someone attacks a person’s character, motives, or other personal attributes instead of addressing the substance of their argument or position. In this case, the opponent is attacking the candidate’s past drug use, which is irrelevant to their qualifications or policies as a political candidate. This is a classic ad hominem fallacy.
41.In which type of fallacy is a minor proposition first asserted before a succession of additional propositions that culminate in a major effect?
- Ad hominem fallacy
- Bandwagon fallacy
- Slippery slope fallacy
- Equivocation fallacy
Explanation:
A slippery slope fallacy occurs when a minor initial action or proposition is claimed to inevitably lead to a series of events culminating in a significant (often negative) effect, without sufficient evidence for the causal chain. For example, “If we allow students to use calculators, they’ll never learn math, and soon they’ll fail all subjects.”
42.Which fallacy implies that two things are relatively alike when they are, in reality, more dissimilar than similar?
- False authority
- False analogy
- False dilemmas
- False cause
Explanation:
A false analogy fallacy occurs when two things are compared as if they are similar in relevant ways, but in reality, they are more dissimilar. For example, comparing a government to a household budget to argue for fiscal policy oversimplifies the differences between the two.
44.Pat has a college degree, so she must make a lot of money. What is the unstated assumption in this argument?
- Everyone with a college degree is happy.
- Everyone with a college degree makes a lot of money.
- Pat learned valuable skills in college.
- Pat works in a lucrative industry.
Explanation:
The argument’s structure is: Premise: Pat has a college degree. Conclusion: She must make a lot of money. The unstated assumption is the general rule that connects the premise to the conclusion. Here, the assumption is that “everyone with a college degree makes a lot of money,” as this would explain why Pat, having a degree, must make a lot of money.
46.1) Bob will win the race. 2) In order to win races, one must have a high level of stamina. 3) Bob has a high level of stamina. Which map is correct for the given argument?
(The image shows a diagram with circles labeled 1, 2, and 3, with arrows indicating relationships. The correct diagram has 2 pointing to 1 and 3 pointing to 1.)
Answer: The diagram where 2 and 3 both point to 1.
Explanation:
The argument can be broken down as follows: Premise 1 (statement 2): "In order to win races, one must have a high level of stamina" (if you win, then you have stamina). Premise 2 (statement 3): "Bob has a high level of stamina." Conclusion (statement 1): "Bob will win the race." However, the logical structure of the argument as presented suggests that statements 2 and 3 are premises supporting statement 1 (the conclusion). In argument mapping, premises point to the conclusion, so both 2 and 3 should point to 1, indicating they jointly support the conclusion. The diagram where 2 → 1 and 3 → 1 is correct.
3.Which situation illustrates the burden of proof fallacy?
- An individual claims to have seen an alien spacecraft.
- A person says, “We cannot cut military spending because cuts will embolden our enemies and make us vulnerable to an attack.” This individual suggests NASA must do so instead of providing supporting evidence.
- A person says, “Since you haven’t been able to lose weight, I will assume you are not following the diet plan.”
- A brother says to his sister, “All you do is talk!” The sister responds to her brother by saying, “You never stop talking!”
Explanation:
The burden of proof fallacy occurs when someone makes a claim but shifts the responsibility of proving or disproving it onto someone else without providing evidence for their own claim. In this scenario, the person claims that cutting military spending will lead to negative consequences but does not provide evidence for this assertion. Instead, they shift the burden by suggesting NASA should take the cuts, implying others must prove why military spending shouldn’t be protected. This avoids the responsibility of supporting their own claim with evidence, which is a classic example of the burden of proof fallacy.
47.1) Coastal cities should run more tsunami drills in their communities.
2) Scientists have reason to believe the likelihood of tsunamis is increasing.
3) Scientific research over the past year shows an increase in underwater earthquakes.
Which statement identifies the sub-premise, the main premise, and the main conclusion?
- 1 is the conclusion, 2 is a premise, 3 is a sub-premise
- 1 is a premise, 2 is a sub-premise, 3 is the conclusion
- 1 is a premise, 2 is the conclusion, 3 is a sub-premise
- 1 is a sub-premise, 2 is a premise, 3 is the conclusion
Explanation:
In a logical argument, the conclusion is the main claim being supported, the premise is a reason supporting the conclusion, and a sub-premise supports the premise. Here, statement 1 ("Coastal cities should run more tsunami drills") is the conclusion because it’s the action being recommended. Statement 2 ("Scientists have reason to believe the likelihood of tsunamis is increasing") is the main premise because it directly supports the need for more drills. Statement 3 ("Scientific research over the past year shows an increase in underwater earthquakes") is a sub-premise because it provides evidence for statement 2, explaining why scientists believe tsunamis are more likely (since underwater earthquakes can cause tsunamis).
48.1) The child is a motivated student.
2) ?
3) Therefore, the child will finish the assignment on time.
Which missing premise makes the argument valid?
- The child’s partner on the assignment is motivated and will finish the assignment on time.
- The child finished the previous assignment on time.
- Motivated students are respected by their classmates.
- Motivated students finish their assignments on time.
Explanation:
For the argument to be valid, the missing premise (statement 2) must logically connect the given premise (statement 1: "The child is a motivated student") to the conclusion (statement 3: "The child will finish the assignment on time"). The premise "Motivated students finish their assignments on time" establishes a general rule that applies to all motivated students, including the child. Therefore, if the child is motivated (statement 1), and motivated students finish on time (missing premise), the conclusion that the child will finish on time follows logically.
49.A college professor falls asleep during a class. So, the professor is probably a bad teacher. Which missing premise makes the argument valid?
- Negative online evaluations of different professors is quite common.
- Falling asleep during a lesson is a sure sign of a poor educator.
- Sleeping during a lesson is unusual.
- Despite the best efforts of the students, their grades remain poor.
Explanation:
The argument’s structure is: Premise 1: The professor falls asleep during class. Conclusion: The professor is probably a bad teacher. For this argument to be valid, the missing premise must link falling asleep to being a bad teacher. The statement "Falling asleep during a lesson is a sure sign of a poor educator" directly connects the premise to the conclusion by establishing that falling asleep indicates poor teaching quality.
49.A college professor falls asleep during a class. So, the professor is probably a bad teacher. Which missing premise makes the argument valid?
- Negative online evaluations of different professors is quite common.
- Falling asleep during a lesson is a sure sign of a poor educator.
- Sleeping during a lesson is unusual.
- Despite the best efforts of the students, their grades remain poor.
Explanation:
The argument’s structure is: Premise 1: The professor falls asleep during class. Conclusion: The professor is probably a bad teacher. For this argument to be valid, the missing premise must link falling asleep to being a bad teacher. The statement "Falling asleep during a lesson is a sure sign of a poor educator" directly connects the premise to the conclusion by establishing that falling asleep indicates poor teaching quality.
51.A customer admires a necklace; it is beautiful. There are other customers interested in this necklace who might show up later to purchase it. Which missing conclusion completes the argument?
- The customer should buy this necklace now.
- The necklace is not worth buying.
- The necklace can be purchased later.
- The customer should look at other necklaces.
Explanation:
The argument’s premises are: 1) The customer admires the necklace and finds it beautiful (implying desire), and 2) Other customers might buy it later (implying urgency). The most logical conclusion is that the customer should buy the necklace now to ensure they get it before others do.
[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built="1" fullwidth="on" _builder_version="4.9.3" _module_preset="default"][et_pb_fullwidth_header title="GET YOUR PROCTORED EXAM DONE FOR YOU SEAMLESSLY BY OUR EXPERT TEAM, UNDETECTED TODAY AT AN AFFORDABLE PRICE." button_one_text="Click Here" button_one_url="https://academiascholars.com/wgu-fast-track-service/" _builder_version="4.9.3" _module_preset="default"]
Are you currently in session at Western Governors University, and you're stuck with your exams, or even writing the long papers? We're here for you. Let's take full control of that course and see yourself graduating in less than 6 months. We promise nothing less than exemplary in your scores, and here's the kicker: We're completely undetectable!
Reach us on any of the following channels:
- Discord Server - https://discord.gg/38d7A4VJea
- WhatsApp: https://wa.me/+19178105386
- Call/SMS: +19178105386
- Website: Academiascholars.com
- Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Homewrkdomain/
- Email: [email protected]