Exam 2 Flashcards Preview

PHIL 102 > Exam 2 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Exam 2 Deck (40):
1

In argument analysis, the remarks and comments that accompany but are not integral to an argument is known as ________.

noise

2

T/F
Convergent premises support a conclusion only when they are conjoined.

False

3

T/F
Argument flags are part of the premises.

False

4

T/F
Consider the following argument:

"We should go to the store before it closes because we need groceries and tomorrow is Sunday."

A reasonable hidden premise might be: the store is closed on Sunday.

True

5

T/F
Side-by-side before-and-after photographs showing the results of a weight-loss program may serve directly as evidence for the effectiveness of that program.

True

6

Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

Jones killed the man with a gun.

Syntactic ambiguity

7

Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

Anyone behaving immorally will be severely punished.

Vagueness

8

T/F
The following would be an example of an extensional definition:

The “nightshade” is a family of vegetables that includes the potato, the eggplant, the chili pepper plant, the tobacco plant, and the petunia.

True

9

T/F
Suppose we were attempting to give an intensional definition for "triangle" with the method of genus and differentia. A plausible genus would be a closed shape and differentia would be 3-sided.

True

10

What’s the problem with this definition?

A cat is a cute animal.

The rule of essential characteristics

11

T/F
The presence of fire is a necessary condition for the presence of oxygen.

False

12

T/F
Having four sides is a necessary condition for being a square.

True

13

A circular definition—one that defines a word in terms of the word itself—is violating which of the rules for good definitions?

The rule of clarity

14

What is the status of the following were it a premise: Dinosaurs (real dinosaurs--like the t-rex--not their evolutionary descendants) currently exist in some areas of the world.

Unacceptable

15

What’s the problem with this definition?

Terrorism is a method of war that consists in intentionally attacking those who ought not to be attacked.

The rule of neutrality

16

What best describes the sort of claim being made in the following statement?

Hummingbirds can fly backwards.

Factural/descriptive claim

17

Which of the following could count as an authority for an appeal to authority?

All of the above

18

What is the problem with the following argument?

Abortion is wrong because abortion is murder.

The argument begs the question

19

Washing D.C. is the capital of the US. Were this a premise, it would be:

Acceptable because it's common knowledge

20

T/F
The premise "The bill will soon be introduced to the House" is not relevant, in our sense, to the conclusion "The bill will become law."

True

21

T/F
If an inductive argument is strong--that is, if its premises are acceptable and if both the internal relevance and sufficiency conditions are satisfied--then the conclusion of that argument is established with absolute certainty.

False

22

T/F
Consider the following:

Smoking probably causes cancer
Smoking certainly causes cancer
The sufficiency conditions is easier to satisfy for 1 than 2.

True

23

T/F
The Bible must be the word of God because the Bible says that it is the word of God. This is a good example of the fallacy of equivocation.

False

24

If a right to euthanasia is grounded in self-determination, it cannot reasonably be limited to the terminally ill. If people have a right to die, why must they wait until they are actually dying before they are permitted to exercise that right?

Diagram:

P1: The right to euthanasia cannot reasonably be limited to the terminally ill.
SC: If people have a right to die, why must they wait until they are actually dying before they are permitted to exercise that right?
C: The right to euthanasia is grounded in self-determination.

both B and C
The sub-conclusion- it is not a statement.
P1 should be the main conclusion.

25

T/F
Consider an argument that involves two premises, P1 and P2, and the conclusion, C. If premises are convergent, then the following arguments--

P1; therefore C

and

P2; therefore C

--should make sense.

True

26

Based on the legend below, which of the following is true?

P1: Anything worth doing is worth doing right.
P2: Logic is worth doing.
SC: Logic is worth doing right.
P3: Anything worth doing right is valuable.
C: Logic is valuable.

P1 and P2 link to support SC, and SC and P3 link to support C.

27

Consider the argument below. Based on the legend below, which of the following is true?

P1: There are many more people alive today than 20 years ago.
P2: The crop yield on farmed land has not measurably increased in the last 20 years.
C: We are facing a food crisis.

P1 and P2 link to support C.

28

Consider the argument below. Based on the legend below, which of the following is true?

If the butler committed the murder, then there would be blood in the kitchen. But there is no blood in the kitchen. So the butler did not commit the murder.

The first two premises link to support the conclusion

29

T/F
Arguments are always fully explicitly expressed.

False

30

T/F
Consider the following argument:

People should be allowed to drive at age 15. By that age, people are old enough to act responsibly. Also, cars today or so safe that very few people would be hurt.

The premises in this argument are linked.

False

31

T/F
When diagramming an argument, if there appears to be a hidden premise that would need to be expressed as a controversial claim, it is best to leave it out of the diagram.

False

32

T/F
Consider the following:

I think there is enough evidence to justify a reasonable conclusion. In the vast majority of cases that have been examined, wearing seat-belts has prevented injuries that would have resulted from automobile accidents. And these cases appear to vastly outnumber the relatively few case in which people have avoided injury because they were not wearing seat-belts and were thrown clear of a vehicle.

A reasonable sub-conclusion is the following: It is reasonable to believe that wearing a seatbelt is a good way to avoid injuries in automobile accidents.

True

33

T/F
Consider this argument:

All cats are mammals, and all mammals are vertebrates, so all cats are mammals.

P1: All dogs are vertebrates.
P2: Some dogs have long hair.
C: Some vertebrates have long hair.
The following diagram properly represents this argument:

P1



P2



C

False

34

Based on the following passage, identify the error(s) in the diagram below.

Life on Mars at some point in the past is probable, because there is evidence of water, where there is water there is likely to be life, and Mars has been around for millions of years.

Diagram:

P1: There is evidence of water on Mars.
P2: Where there is water there is likely to be life.
P3: Mars has been around for millions of years.
C: Life on Mars at some point in the past is probable.
P1+P2+P3



C

Only P1 and P2 should be linked

35

T/F
Context: Your friend gives you a ride to a campus event, and you have to work early the next morning. It’s getting late, and you say to your friend, "It’s getting late," and your friend responds, "OK, let’s get out of here." Your sentence—"It’s getting late"—literally means that you want to leave the event.

False

36

Identify the problem of language in the following argument:

All rivers have banks and all banks have money, so all rivers have money.

Fallacy of equivocation

37

T/F
In principle, the number of sentences that humans can understand is unbounded.

True

38

Pick the best hidden premise(s) and/or hidden conclusion(s) to complete this argument.

If today is Thursday, then Zoe is either at work or on the golf course. Therefore, Zoe is at work.

Hidden premise: Today is Thursday and Zoe is not on the golf course

39

T/F
If A is a necessary condition for B, then B is a sufficient condition for A.

True

40

Consider the following argument:

P1. Either the butler is guilty, or the maid.

P2. The butler is not guilty.

SC. The maid is guilty.

P3. If the maid is guilty, then the gardner is guilty.

P4. The gardner was found with the murder weapon.

MC. The gardner is guilty.


Which of the following are true:

A, B, and D
P1 and P2 are linked in support of SC.
P4 converges to support MC.
SC and P3 are linked in support of MC.