Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/53

Click to flip

53 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
It is better to use emotive/neutral language when writing an argument.
Neutral language
What is emotive language?
It is language that evokes emotion - emotion that is not necessarily worthy of the subject.
What does the term "interwoven arguments" mean?
It means that there are two or more arguments in a single passage.
a term that has multiple meanings and you are not sure which meaning is being used
ambiguous
a term that is simply unclear
vague
an argument that cannot be solved by clarifying definitions
obviously genuine dispute
an argument that is resolved after certain terms are clarified
merely verbal dispute
an argument that requires terms to be clarified, but after clarification, an argument still remains
apparently verbal but really genuine dispute
In a definition, the ________ are the words that define the _____________.
difiniens; definiendum
A definiendum is the "conclusion" of a definition. True or False?
TRUE
this type of definition assigns a new meaning to a new or old word
stipulative
this type of definition is already established for a word
lexical
this type of defintion dissolves ambiguity.
precising
Atttibutes shared by all objects, and only those objects, to which a general term applies i.e. someone who performs a role - actor
intension
objects to which a term applies i.e. Brad Pitt, Taye Diggs
extention
this definition defines by limiting to a specific situation where actions or operations lead to specific results, i.e. according to a LITMUS STRIP (an action) this substance is acidic
operative definition
a broad class of objects related by certain attributes
genus
certain attributes in a sub class that differentiates one sub class from another
species difference
a defintion that defines using a class and a sub class
definition by genus and difference
In a definition by genus and species, it's okay if the definition is a little too broad or narrow. T/F?
False. The definition cannot be too broad or narrow.
You should/shouldn't use ambiguous or obscure language in a definition.
shouldn't
A defintion should not be negative if it can be affirmative. T/F?
True
the argument focuses on insecurities or emotions of the audience
appeal to emotion
the argument makes an appeal to the mercy of the audience
appeal to pity
the argument uses "strong-arm" tactics; the threat can be physical, monetary, etc.
appeal to force
the argument accuses the opponent of being "stupid," "dishonest" when the argument has nothing to do with the opponent but a seperate issue
ad hominem ABUSIVE
the argument suggests that the opponent to the argument is unreliable or dishonest because of the people or things he/she is associated with; it has nothing to do with the actual argument
ad hominem CIRCUMSTANTIAL; guilt by association
Mandy is a blonde. All blondes have no idea what they are talking about so why would we listen to her proposal?
ad hominem Poisoning the Well; opponent can do nothing to defend him/herself
the premises of this argument support a different conclusion
irrelevant conclusion
this argument misrepresents the position of its opponent in order to make it easier to argue against
straw man
this argument attacks a nonexisting part of arugment, causes distraction
red herring
this argument has a conclusion that does not follow from the premises
non sequitur
this argument argues that "well, you do it TOO!"
tu quoque
these fallacies have premises that are not relevant to the conclusion
fallcies of relevance
this argument says that b/c something is not known to be false, you can say it is true
argument from ignorance
this argument's conclusion is based on the judgement of a presumed authority figure who has no legitimate claim to expertise in the field, or may be biased
appeal in inappropriate authority
this argument treats something that is not really the cause of the event as the cause of the event
false cause
this argument argues that event B was after event A - therefore, event A caused event B. i.e. the rooster crows to wake up the sun "after the thing, because of the thing
post hoc
this arguments says that if we allow event A to occur, event B (evil) will follow i.e. marijuna is a gateway drug
slippery slope
the premise(s) of this argument is for a specific example, but the conclusion is in general; basing a conclusion on too few examples
hasty generalization
these fallacies have premises that are too weak or inadequate to warrant the conclusions
fallcies of defective induction
in this argument, the conclusion is assumed in the premise, or the truth of the premise is stated in the conclusion; it is circular
begging the ?
this argument presents a choice between two options, but in reality, there are more than only two options
false dilemma
these fallacies have conclusions that depend on an assumption
fallacies of presumption
in this argument a loose or awkward phrase is intrepreted one way in the premise and another way in the conclusion
amphiboly
this argument emphasizes certain parts of a phrase to convey a different meaning than the actual meaning; i.e. a quote out of context, sensationalized "FREE" or "LOW PRICES"
accent
this argument reasons from parts to a whole, i.e. Player A is a great player. Player B is a great player. Therefore, the team of A and B must be a great team.
composition
this argument reasons from whole to parts, i.e. Team 1 is a great team. Player C and D are on Team 1, so they must be great players!
division
these fallacies use confusion or a shift in meaning to establish their conclusions
fallacies of ambiguity
A: Smiley is guilty of arson. He confessed it was him who started the fire.
B: You are wrong. Smiley has not even been accused of starting the fire, so there's no way he could be (proven) guilty.
This dispute is...
merely verbal
Nigel deserves a 2nd chance. He just found out his wife is really his sister. That would rattle anyone. This is a(n)...
appeal to pity
10 hr work day?! NO! You know who wants that? Nigel. His home life sucks. Of course he wants to work 10hr/day, he doesn't wanna go home! This is a(n)...
ad hominem circumstantial
Too bad you don't agree with the plans. We need someone to promote. It would be a shame if you didn't get the promotion. This is a(n)...
appeal to force