Logic and Fallacies Quiz
50 Questions
1 Views

Choose a study mode

Play Quiz
Study Flashcards
Spaced Repetition
Chat to Lesson

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

Non-sequitur refers to presenting sequences that do not logically follow from each other.

True (A)

A false dichotomy presents arguments with an unlimited number of choices.

False (B)

Drawing parallels between two situations is always a valid analogy.

False (B)

The analogy of the earth's atmosphere being compared to a blanket is an example of weak analogy.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A false dichotomy can be exemplified by the statement, 'You are either my friend or my enemy.'

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The concept of a false/weak analogy involves a justified comparison between two unrelated scenarios.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The phrase 'building up like steam under pressure' is an example of a valid analogy.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Non-sequitur arguments are characterized by a clear and logical progression.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A deductive argument is valid if its conclusion must follow from its premises.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Validity and soundness are the same concepts in deductive reasoning.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

An argument can be valid even if one or more of its premises are false.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

If all premises of an argument are true, the conclusion must be false.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A sound argument guarantees the truth of the conclusion.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

You must verify the premises of an argument before determining its validity.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

An invalid argument can still be considered sound.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

In deductive reasoning, a valid argument is sufficient to prove an argument's quality.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A well-constructed longer argument consists of premises and conclusions.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Each premise in an argument should be supported by a different type of reasoning.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

An interim conclusion is a conclusion drawn from the main argument.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The quality of presented arguments should not be discussed during team analysis.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Relevant information should be highlighted during the analysis of texts.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

All premises in an argument must lead to the same conclusion.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A fallacy can enhance the strength of an argument.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Interim conclusions can independently support the overall conclusion.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Grouping similar reasons into a set of reasons is not necessary in argument construction.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Emails are considered proper channels for discussing argument structures in a team.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Vioxx was effective in reducing the risk of heart attacks in the tested animals.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The consumer research involved a total of 531 responses.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The African green monkeys tested for Vioxx are known to experience cardiovascular problems.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

It is important to evaluate whether the source material is recent and reliable.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Consumer polls were conducted over several days and times to gather varied responses.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Authenticity of evidence is an important factor to consider when critically evaluating material.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

It is estimated that about 200,000 people suffered heart attacks due to Vioxx.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Establishing the popularity of a DIY supermarket was the aim of the consumer research.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Practice materials are available on Moodle.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The CRAAP worksheet is intended for evaluating source credibility.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Debate practice is excluded from the session topics.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Checking for real or fake news involves group discussions.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Fallacies and faulty arguments are not addressed in the course.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

An example of a fallacy is the appeal to questionable authority.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Research on pro/con topics is discouraged before debates.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The course content does not include how to spot fake news.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Ad hominem fallacy involves attacking opponents on personal terms rather than reasons.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The passage demonstrates sound reasoning by providing clear evidence for its claims.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Misrepresenting a person's argument involves focusing on irrelevant characteristics.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

A false dichotomy presents more than two options to resolve a problem.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The argument in favor of curfews claims there are only two options: do nothing or enforce curfews.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Emotive language in an argument enhances its logical appeal.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

The discussion of curfews exemplifies misrepresentation by ignoring the main opposing arguments.

<p>True (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Complicity in the audience refers to engaging them actively in evaluating arguments.

<p>False (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

Flashcards

Non-sequitur

Presenting a sequence of ideas or arguments that do not logically connect to each other.

False Dichotomy

Presenting an argument as a simple choice between two options, when there are actually more possibilities.

False Analogy

Drawing a comparison between two situations that are not actually similar enough to justify the comparison.

Weak Analogy

A weak analogy fails to establish a strong connection between the two situations being compared, making the argument less convincing.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Critical Reading

A process of carefully evaluating written material to understand its meaning, identify its strengths and weaknesses, and determine its credibility.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Premise

A statement that supports a claim or an argument.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Interim Conclusion

A conclusion drawn from several premises that is subsequently used as a premise for another conclusion.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Conclusion

A statement that logically follows from a set of premises.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Set of Reasons

A group of reasons that support an interim conclusion.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Well-constructed Argument

A longer argument that is structured with several interim conclusions leading to a final conclusion.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Fallacy

A flaw in an argument that weakens its logic or makes it unreliable.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Analyzing Arguments

Examining an argument's structure and individual components to assess its soundness and validity.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Active Reading

Highlighting key points, taking notes, and identifying relevant information while reading.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Team Discussion

A group of people discussing their understanding and interpretations of a text.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Authenticity of Evidence

The origin of evidence used to support a claim. Consider if the source is credible, trustworthy, and reliable.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Replication of Findings

Investigating if similar findings have been reported by other researchers or studies.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Realistic Conditions

Assessing if the research conditions realistically reflect the situation being studied.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Validity of Research

Determining if the methods employed are scientifically sound and produce unbiased results.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Biases and Distortions in Data

Analyzing whether there are any biases or distortions that could affect the accuracy of the data.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Relevance of Information

Examining whether the information provided is relevant to the topic or problem being addressed.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Authority of Source

Identifying the author(s) and publisher of the research to assess their credibility and expertise.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Recency of Information

Checking the publication date to determine if the information is up-to-date.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Valid Deductive Argument

A deductive argument is valid if it's impossible for all its premises to be true and its conclusion false.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Sound Deductive Argument

A deductive argument is sound if it is valid and all its premises are actually true.

Signup and view all the flashcards

False Premises in Valid Arguments

The premises of a deductive argument might be false, even if the argument is valid.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Validity in Deductive Reasoning

Validity in deductive reasoning refers to the logical structure of the argument, not the truth of its premises.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Soundness in Deductive Reasoning

Soundness in deductive reasoning means the argument is both valid and has true premises.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Valid Arguments & False Conclusions

A valid deductive argument provides a strong logical connection, but doesn't guarantee a true conclusion if its premises are false.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Sound Arguments & True Conclusions

A sound deductive argument is the ideal, with both valid structure and true premises, leading to a true conclusion.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Deductive Reasoning Goal

Deductive reasoning aims to arrive at a conclusion that is a logically necessary consequence of its premises.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Ad hominem

A fallacy that attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument itself. This undermines credibility and focuses on personal characteristics unrelated to the topic.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Ignoring the main opposing reasons

A fallacy that focuses on minor details of the opposing argument to make it seem weak, while ignoring the main points.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Misrepresenting a person or facts

A fallacy that misrepresents someone's words or actions to undermine their argument.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Focusing on characteristics irrelevant to the argument

A fallacy that focuses on irrelevant characteristics of a person or argument to distract from the main point.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Misrepresentation or trivialization

A fallacy that presents a false or exaggerated view of a situation to support a claim.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Appealing to emotions

A fallacy that uses strong emotions to persuade an audience, instead of logical reasoning.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Assumptions

A fallacy that assumes something is true without evidence, or that everyone agrees with a statement.

Signup and view all the flashcards

Study Notes

Critical Approach - Session 2: Analyzing the Quality of Arguments

  • Reality can be complex, leading to seemingly contradictory observations from different perspectives.
  • The session focuses on analyzing the quality of arguments.

Lesson Overview (Afternoon Classes)

  • Lesson 1: Review of terminology and content from previous session, including argument quality and practice exercises.
  • Lesson 2: Discusses fallacies related to the quality of arguments. Covers logical reasoning, deductive reasoning, and validity along with practice exercises.
  • Lesson 3: Defining and understanding research.
  • Lesson 4: Optional practice exercises.

Lesson Goals – Session 2

  • Assess argument structure and quality.
  • Identify additional argument features.
  • Define key terms related to arguments and fallacies.
  • Explain deductive and inductive reasoning.
  • Explain research terms and concepts.
  • Evaluate relevant sources for research.

Revision – Arguments: Some Key Terms

  • Overall Argument: End point of reasoning, often aligned with author's point of view.
  • Contributing Arguments: Points of view supported by reasoning.
  • Conclusion: A declarative statement presented as an argument and believed to be true (though may not be so in reality.)
  • Line of Reasoning: Logical order of reasons and evidence to support author's position.
  • Position: A point of view, often supported by reasoning.
  • Proposition: Statement presented as an argument, asserted to be true.

Revision: Typical Features of an Argument

  • Author's Position/Point of View: Usually reflected in the conclusion, based on their assumptions.
  • Premises/Propositions/Arguments/Reasons: Statements believed to be true and presented as supporting a point.
  • Line of Reasoning: The logical order of the premises and how they lead to a conclusion.
  • Conclusion: Usually reflects the author's point of view; intended to persuade.
  • Use of Indicators/Signal Words: Words such as 'therefore', 'accordingly' that signal the conclusion.

Revision Exercise: A Proper Argument?

  • Students should discuss whether the provided example is a proper argument based on structure.
  • A reminder: Disagreeing with an argument doesn't mean it's flawed structurally.

Arguments: Explicit/Implicit, Denoted/Connoted

  • Explicit: Arguments with clear structure and lines of reasoning.
  • Implicit: Arguments lacking a clear structure, often hidden or subtle.

Denoted and Connoted Meaning

  • Denoted Meaning: Literal meaning of a word or phrase.
  • Connoted Meaning: Associated meaning or implied meaning.

Logical Fallacies and Fallacious Arguments

  • Fallacies are errors in reasoning that weaken an argument.
  • Fallacies can be illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points.
  • Lacking supporting evidence.
  • Avoid fallacies in your own arguments and watch for them in others.

Fallacies: Errors in Reasoning

  • Fallacies are false or unsound arguments.
  • Fallacy examples include: Non Sequitur, False Dilemma, Weak Analogy, Castle of Cards, Slippery Slope, Attacking the Person, Generalization, Misrepresentation, Straw Man, Appeal to Questionable Authority, False Premise, Ad Hominem, and others.

Non-Sequitur

  • Presenting sequences of ideas that do not logically follow on from one another.
  • Often, an illogical connection between ideas.

False Dichotomy / False Dilemma

  • Presenting a limited number of options (usually just two) when there are more.
  • Commonly phrased "either/or".

False/Weak Analogy

  • Drawing parallels between two similar situations.
  • The comparison has to be justified and have merited similarities

Castle of Cards

  • An argument built on a shaky foundation.
  • Removing one element causes the whole to collapse

Slippery Slope

  • Arguing that one event will inevitably lead to a series of increasingly negative events.

Ad Hominem

  • Attacking the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.
  • Using emotional language not related to the argument.

(Hasty) Generalizations

  • Drawing conclusions based on insufficient evidence.
  • Making broad statements based on few examples.

Red Herring

  • Deliberately distracting from the main issue.
  • Avoiding the central question at hand.

Straw Person

  • Misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.
  • Creating a weaker version of the argument to critique.

Common Opinion/Ad Populum

  • Claiming something is true because many people believe it.

Appeals to Questionable Authority

  • Using a person or source with no relevant credentials/expertise as an authority figure.

Critical Reading Practice Exercise

  • Read and analyze texts A and B provided.
  • Highlight relevant details, take notes.
  • Discuss the quality of arguments within your team, considering any fallacies.

Critical Reading Practice Exercise

  • Evaluate the authenticity and validity of the source material by examining the currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose of the source.
  • Identify potential distortions, biases, and weaknesses of the evidence.
  • Utilize CRAAP worksheet to assess the information critically.

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning & Research

  • Inductive Reasoning: Specific to general.
  • Deductive Reasoning: General to specific.
  • Theory: Explanation of observed events.
  • Hypothesis: Testable statement based on a theory.
  • Pattern: Repeatable trend or regularity in observation

Deductive Reasoning & Validity

  • A deductive argument's conclusion should follow logically from the premises.
  • A valid argument ensures if its premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
  • Validity ≠ good; Soundness requires both valid reasoning AND true premises for a conclusion to be sound.

Inductive Reasoning: Purpose & Strength

  • Inductive arguments are judged strong or weak.
  • Considerations for inductive arguments include: accuracy of the data/premises, whether the sample size is adequate, and any potential bias.

Manipulated Images: What to Do

  • Reverse image searches can verify the authenticity of pictures.

Manipulated Celebrity Voices

  • Technology can be utilized for altering or making a faux celebrity voice.

Practice Exercises

  • Various exercises, including identifying fallacies and analyzing argument structure.
  • Use provided materials in the Moodle folder

Interim/Intermediate Conclusions

  • Define interim conclusions as a summary statement that connects the previous ideas before making a final one.

Practice Session

  • In-class session devoted to practical application of concepts.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Quiz Team

Related Documents

Critical Approach Session 2 PDF

Description

Test your understanding of logical fallacies and argument structures with this quiz. Explore concepts like non-sequitur, false dichotomy, and the validity of analogies. Perfect for students studying introductory logic and critical thinking.

More Like This

Logical Fallacies Quiz
16 questions
Logical Fallacies Quiz Prep
14 questions
Fallacies in Argumentation
10 questions
Understanding Logical Fallacies
8 questions

Understanding Logical Fallacies

LegendaryAquamarine4422 avatar
LegendaryAquamarine4422
Use Quizgecko on...
Browser
Browser