Critical Thinking Exam 1

Front 1

Argument

Back 1

presentation of claims or propositions intended to establish a claim

Front 2

Proposition

Back 2

sentence that has a truth value

Cannot be questions or commands

Front 3

Premise

Back 3

proposition that serves as an assumption in an argument

Front 4

Conclusion

Back 4

proposition that is intended to follow as a consequence of the premise of an argument

Front 5

inference

Back 5

process of reasoning from premise to conclusion

Front 6

law of contradiction

Back 6

a predicate P and a predicate NOT P cannot belong in the same Subject (S) at the same time and in the same respect

Front 7

Law of the excluded middle

Back 7

All propositions are either true or false there is no middle ground

Front 8

rhetoric

Back 8

study of persuasion

Front 9

sophist

Back 9

Wise guy-1st one was Corox of Sicily (5th century B.C.)

Front 10

Euphemism

Back 10

word or phrase that implies a positive attitude

Front 11

Dysphemism

Back 11

word or phrase that implies a negative attitude

Front 12

rhetorical analogy

Back 12

comparison used to imply a negative /positive attitude

(As graceful as a bull in a china shop)

Front 13

rhetorical definition

Back 13

" one variety of begging the question" presupposes the conclusion through the meaning of the terms in the premise

(Abortion is murder of an unborn child)

Front 14

stereotype

Back 14

a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.

(All southerners like country music)

Front 15

Hasty generalization

Back 15

inductive argument with a sample size that is too small

(Hitler was a vegetarian, so vegetarians can't be trusted)

(4 out of 5 doctors say Advil works, so it must work)

Front 16

Innuendo

Back 16

implies a negative attitude without directly stating it

(David dates a lot of people, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN)

Front 17

Loaded question

Back 17

using a question to hide an unwarranted assumption

(Who did Bush hire for 9-11)

(Have you quit smoking)

( Have you stopped beating your wife)

Front 18

Weasler

Back 18

makes a claim that only seems to support an argument

Front 19

Down player

Back 19

down plays importance

(she got her degree online)

Front 20

proof surrogate

Back 20

claims there is evidence without citing it

(As we all know Chevy is better then Ford)

Front 21

Hyperbole

Back 21

exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally

(Ages have passed since i last saw you)

(Your suitcase weighs a ton)

Front 22

Ad hominem

Abusive

Circumstantial

To quo que

Back 22

persuades by attacking the person making the argument rather then the argument itself

3 types

1 (Hilliary is a liar)

2 (Of course your against abortion your a priest)

3 (you do it too)

Front 23

Genetic fallacy

Back 23

persuades by attacking the origin of an argument, instead of the argument itself

( Don't believe chemistry it came from Alchemy)

Front 24

Straw Man

Back 24

persuades by attacking a weakened version of a position

( Will says put more money into education, Wally says Will wants to cut our defense programs money)...((weak example))

Front 25

Principle of charity

Back 25

presents strong argument of opposition to attack

Front 26

false dilemma

Back 26

persuades by suggesting there are only 2 options when there may be more

( either your for me or against me)

Front 27

perfectionist

Back 27

persuades by claiming a plan should be rejected if it isn't perfect

(If policy X cannot meet all our needs, then we should deny it)

Front 28

line drawing

Back 28

persuades by claiming if a precise line can't be drawn then no distinction can be made

Front 29

petitio principii

(circular reasoning)

Back 29

persuades by assuming the conclusion (the real begging the question)

(God must exist because the Bible says so, The bible is true because it was written by God)

Front 30

Argument from outrage

Back 30

substituting anger for evidence

Front 31

Ad Baculum

Back 31

persuades by appealing to force or threat

Front 32

Ad Misericordiam

Back 32

persuades by appealing to pity

Front 33

Apple polishing

Back 33

persuades by appealing to flattery

Front 34

guilt trip

Back 34

persuades by appealing to guilt

Front 35

wishful thinking

Back 35

persuades by substituting hope for evidence

Front 36

red herring

Back 36

persuades by leading discussion away from the relevant issue

Front 37

smoke screen

Back 37

persuades by leading the discussion away from the relevant issue multiple times

-multiple red herrings

Front 38

accident

Back 38

persuades by applying a general rule to a case it was never intended to be applied too

( Ambulance drivers should be charged for speeding)

Front 39

Ad Verecundiam

Back 39

persuades by appealing to a false authority ( or authority in the wrong field)

Front 40

Ad Populum

Back 40

persuades by appealing to majority's opinion concerning matters of fact

Front 41

Post Hoc ergo

Back 41

persuades by assuming causation where there is only evidence for succession

( The rooster crows then the sun comes up, he must make the sun come up)

Front 42

Slippery slope

Back 42

persuades by citing a negative consequence of a policy when it might not happen

( Drinking leads to death by liver damage)

Front 43

composition

Back 43

persuades by assuming the whole has the same properties as the parts

Front 44

weak analogy

Back 44

persuades by analogy based on insufficient similarity

Front 45

Ad ignorantian

Back 45

persuades by appealing to ignorance

(uses unknown as positive evidence)

(we haven't proved Bigfoot doesn't exist so he must exist)

Front 46

contrariety ( Syllogism)

Back 46

Syllogism

cannot both be true but both can be false

Front 47

sub-contrariety (Syllogism)

Back 47

Syllogism

cannot both be false but both can be true