Chapter 3 Terms Flashcards

(37 cards)

0
Q

Asserts that something is true or not true

A

Claim of fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
1
Q

Provides factual information and background material on the subject at hand or establishes why the subject is a problem that needs addressing

A

Narration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

In the Toulmin model, this consists of further assurances or data without which the assumption lacks authority.

A

Backing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

A fallacy in which the writer repeats the claim as a way to provide evidence.

A

Circular reasoning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Fallacy refers to the diversionary tactic of switching the argument from the issue at hand to the character of the other speaker.

A

Ad hominem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Proposes a change

A

Claim of policy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

A fallacy in which a claim is based on evidence or support that is in doubt.

A

Begging the question

It “begs” a question whether the support itself is sound.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Argues that something is good or bad, right or wrong

A

Claim of value

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Fallacy occurs when someone who has no expertise to speak on an issue is cited as an authority.

A

Appeal to false authority

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

This fallacy occurs when evidence boils down to “everybody’s doing it, so it must be a good thing to do.”

A

Ad populum or Bandwagon appeal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

In the Toulmin model, this expresses the assumption necessarily shared by the speaker and the audience.

A

Assumption or warrant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q
Five part argument structure used by classical rhetoricians:
Introduction
Narration
Confirmation
Refutation
Conclusion
A

The classical oration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Introduces the reader to the subject under discussion.

A

Introduction (exordium)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

fallacy that occurs when two things are compared that are not comparable.

A

Faulty analogy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Usually the major part of the text, the confirmation includes the proof needed to make the writers case.

A

Confirmation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

A process of reasoned inquiry; a persuasive discourse resulting in a coherent and considered movement from a claim to a conclusion

16
Q

A fallacy in which a faulty conclusion is reached because of inadequate evidence.

A

Hasty generalization

17
Q

Also called an assertion or proposition, it states the arguments main idea or position. It differs from a topic or subject in that it has to be arguable.

18
Q

In the Toulmin model, it explains the terms and conditions necessitated by the qualifier

19
Q

Addresses the Counterargument. It is a bridge between the writers proof and conclusion.

20
Q

Brings the essay to a satisfying close

21
Q

A logical process whereby the writer reasons from particulars to universals, using specific cases in order to draw a conclusion, which is also called a generalization.

22
Q

A logical process whereby one reaches a conclusion by starting with a general principle or universal truth (a major premise) and applying it to a specific case (a minor premise)
Demonstrated in form of a syllogism

23
Q

In the Toulmin model, it uses words like usually, probably, maybe, in most cases, and most likely to temper the claim, making it less absolute.

24
A logical structure that uses the major premise and minor premise to reach a necessary conclusion
Syllogism
25
A fallacy in which the speaker presents two extreme options as the only possible choices
Either/or fallacy (False dilemma)
26
Evidence based in something the writer knows, whether it's from personal experience, observations, or general knowledge of events
First hand evidence
27
Potential vulnerabilities or weaknesses in an argument. They often arise from a failure to make a logical connection between the claim and the evidence used to support it.
Logical fallacy
29
A fallacy that occurs when a speaker chooses a deliberately poor or oversimplified example in order to ridicule and refute an idea
Straw man
30
A thesis that does not list all the points the writer intends to cover in an essay.
Open thesis
31
"After which therefore because of which" Fallacy meaning that it is incorrect to always claim that something is a cause just because it happened earlier. Correlation does not imply causation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
32
Developed by psychiatrist Carl Rogers, these are based on the assumption that having a full understanding of an opposing position is essential to responding to it persuasively and refuting it in a way that is accommodating rather than alienating.
Rogerian arguments
33
In the Toulmin model, it gives voice to possible objections
Rebuttal
34
A statement of the main idea of the argument that also precess the major points the writer intends to make.
Closed thesis
35
An approach to analyzing and constructing arguments created by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin in his book The Uses of Argument.
Toulmin Model: Because (evidence as support), therefore (claim), since (warrant or assumption), on account of (backing), unless (reservation).
36
Includes things that can be measured, cited, counted, or otherwise represented in numbers- for instance, statistics, surveys, polls, census information
Quantitative evidence
36
Evidence that is accessed through research, reading, and investigation. It includes factual and historical information, expert opinion, and quantitative data.
Second hand evidence