Deductive Reasoning and Syllogism Quiz

Deductive Reasoning = Going from general ideas to specific conclusions based on premises Inductive Reasoning = Determining generalizations based on specific observations Warrant = The assumption on which the claim and evidence are based Rogerian Argument = Conveying understanding and validating opinions with empathy

All dogs have ears; Golden Retrievers are dogs, therefore they have ears. = Deductive Reasoning If someone notices that every time they eat spicy food, they get a stomach ache, they might use inductive reasoning to determine that spicy food causes stomach aches. = Inductive Reasoning An apple is a fruit. All fruit is good. Therefore, apples are good. = Deductive Reasoning Needle exchange programs should be abolished because they only cause more people to use drugs. = Warrant

Syllogism = A form of deductive reasoning where a specific conclusion is made by analyzing two other premises or ideas Polemic = A speech or piece of writing expressing a strongly critical attack on or controversial opinion about someone or something Denying the overwhelming scientific evidence only puts our planet and future generations at risk. = Polemic The idea that climate change is a hoax is dangerous and irresponsible. = Polemic

Ad hominem argument = Refutes an argument by attacking the character of the person making it, instead of the logic or premise of the argument itself Begging the question = When an individual assumes the standpoint of another person without any evidence or proof; assuming the truth of the conclusion Doubtful authority = Occurs in cases where the supposed authority figure does have some relevant credentials or expertise, but these are of questionable quality Either/or reasoning = When one claims there are only two possible sides to an argument when there are actually more

Warrant = What fuels the claim Qualifier = Shows that the warrant may not always be true Backing = Evidence to support warrant Rebuttal = Addressing opposing views

A person assumes all doctors recommend a specific medication because a celebrity endorses it. = Doubtful authority A person argues that since they love dogs, everyone should also love dogs. = Non-sequitur A person dismisses someone's argument by mentioning their personal hobbies instead of addressing the argument itself. = Ad hominem argument A person states that if you don't like cold weather, you must love hot weather, with no middle ground. = Either/or reasoning

'Not all students learn best through traditional lectures.' - Qualifier, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal = Qualifier 'Research shows that students retain more information when they engage in hands-on activities.' - Qualifier, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal = Backing 'Based on educational psychology principles, active learning leads to better comprehension.' - Qualifier, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal = Warrant 'Although some students may struggle initially, active learning can be adapted to various learning styles.' - Qualifier, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal = Rebuttal

'All politicians are corrupt; therefore, you can't trust any of them.' = Hasty generalization 'Since this famous actress uses this skincare product, it must be effective.' = False analogy 'He is a great actor; so his opinion on climate change must be valid.' = Doubtful authority 'You either support this policy completely or you are against it.' = Either/or reasoning

Deductive Reasoning = Going from general ideas to specific conclusions based on inferences Inductive Reasoning = Determining generalizations based on specific observations Syllogism = Making a specific conclusion by analyzing two other premises Rogerian Argument = Conveying understanding by validating opinions, using empathy, and finding common ground

Warrant = The assumption on which a claim and evidence are based Polemic = Expressing a strongly critical attack or controversial opinion Claim = The main point or argument being made Evidence = Facts or information supporting a claim

All dogs have ears; Golden Retrievers are dogs, therefore they have ears. = Deductive Reasoning If someone notices that every time they eat spicy food, they get a stomach ache, they might use inductive reasoning to determine that spicy food causes stomach aches. = Inductive Reasoning An apple is a fruit. All fruit is good. Therefore, apples are good. = Syllogism Needle exchange programs should be abolished because they only cause more people to use drugs. = Warrant

The idea that climate change is a hoax is dangerous and irresponsible. Denying the overwhelming scientific evidence only puts our planet and future generations at risk. = Strawman Fallacy Needle exchange programs should be abolished because they only cause more people to use drugs. = False Cause Fallacy I saw a lot of birds flying south yesterday; today it is cold out, so the birds must have known it was going to be cold and were flying south to avoid it. = Post Hoc Fallacy Everyone knows that this policy is good, so it must be the right choice. = Bandwagon Fallacy

An apple a day keeps the doctor away. = Claim Studies have shown that regular exercise improves overall health. = Evidence Therefore, incorporating exercise into your daily routine is beneficial. = Warrant Some may argue that exercise is time-consuming, but the long-term benefits outweigh the time investment. = Rebuttal

Ad hominem argument = Refutes an argument by attacking the character of the person making it, instead of the logic or premise of the argument itself Begging the question = When an individual assumes the standpoint of another person without any evidence or proof; assuming the truth of the conclusion Doubtful authority = Occurs in cases where the supposed authority figure does have some relevant credentials or expertise, but these are of questionable quality Either/or reasoning = When one claims there are only two possible sides to an argument when there are actually more

Warrant = The basis or reasoning that connects the claim and the evidence Qualifier = Shows that the warrant may not always be true Backing = Evidence to support the warrant Rebuttal = Addressing opposing views

Someone argues that all politicians are corrupt because one politician was caught in a scandal = Hasty generalization An individual believes a statement is true because a celebrity said it, even though the celebrity has no expertise in that area = Doubtful authority Claiming that if you don't support a certain policy, then you must be against progress = Either/or reasoning Dismissing someone's argument about climate change by pointing out their fashion choices = Ad hominem argument

All birds have wings. Penguins also have wings. Therefore, penguins can fly. = False analogy My mother is a doctor, so she knows best about my health condition. = Appeal to false authority I saw a black cat cross my path yesterday, so I know today will be unlucky. = Hasty generalization If you don't study hard, you will fail. Therefore, if you study hard, you'll pass. = Non-sequitur

Assuming that because two things share one characteristic, they must also share others. = False analogy Claiming something is true because someone famous said it, despite their lack of expertise in that area. = Doubtful authority Stating there are only two possible options when there could be more. = Either/or reasoning Drawing a conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises. = Non-sequitur