PSYCH Exam 3

Identify which conclusion the following premise would adequately demonstrate: Premise: I picked up a copy of The New York Times yesterday and noticed a typo on the front page.

Conclusion: Yesterday's New York Times contained at least one mistake.

True or false: A formally invalid argument can never be strong.

False

True or false: If an inductive argument is strong, this means its conclusion is definitely true.

False

True or false: This is not a valid example of denying the consequent If you watch cartoons, you're a child. You're not a child. Therefore, you don't watch cartoons

False If you watch cartoons, you're a child. You're not a child. Therefore, you don't watch cartoons

Consider the following argument. Identify which of the following additional pieces of information would, if true, cause the argument to violate the criterion of relevance? About 1% of American adults are currently inmates in an American prison. Jordan is an American adult, so there is a 1% chance he is an inmate in an American prison.

Jordan is currently on vacation in Brazil.

One of the following appeals to authority are fallacious, and some are not. Identify the fallacious appeal.

Many have said that the president will not be re-elected if she doesn't alter her campaign platform to attract more young voters. I don't see any sign that she'll alter her campaign, so I expect that she will lose.

Identify which premise would adequately demonstrate the following conclusion: Conclusion: Most North Americans like to get flowers on Valentine's Day.

Premise: I asked several acclaimed anthropologists who study North American dating practices, and they all told me that comprehensive studies show that most people like to get flowers on Valentine's Day.

Identify if it is a valid example of affirming the antecedent: If you watch cartoons, you're a child. You watch cartoons. Therefore, you're a child.

Yes If you watch cartoons, you're a child. You watch cartoons. Therefore, you're a child.

Identify if its is an inductive argument. This parrot is either dead or alive. It hasn't moved for a long time, so I think it's probably dead.

Yes This parrot is either dead or alive. It hasn't moved for a long time, so I think it's probably dead.

Identify whether its a truth-functional statement. Whenever it's sunny out, my brother takes the dog for a walk.

Yes Whenever it's sunny out, my brother takes the dog for a walk.

Identify if it is a valid argument. You wrote your paper on either Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings. Anyone who hates science fiction wouldn't write their paper on Star Wars. You hate science fiction, so you must not have written on Star Wars—you must have written on The Lord of the Rings.

Yes You wrote your paper on either Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings. Anyone who hates science fiction wouldn't write their paper on Star Wars. You hate science fiction, so you must not have written on Star Wars—you must have written on The Lord of the Rings.

Is this a strong argument? Someone who loves me as much as you say you do would marry me and stay with me for at least ten years. You married me and we've been together for ten years so far, so you probably love me as much as you say you do.

Yes this is a strong argument

Literally, "post hoc ergo propter hoc" means:

after this therefore because of this

denying the consequent

if p then q not q therefore not p valid

Which of the following are not one of the five criteria that should be considered when evaluating the adequacy of an appeal to authority?

the information must be a subject of controversy in the field, such that an individual expert's opinion is required

True or false: An argument that claims to prove its conclusion definitively requires more support than an argument with a tentative conclusion

True

True or false: Every deductive argument contains at least one truth-functional statement.

True

True or false: The amount of evidence we should consider adequate varies according to the context in which an argument is made.

True

Identify if this is a valid argument. Any decent human being is happier with a pet. You're a decent human being, so you'd be happier with a pet.

True Any decent human being is happier with a pet. You're a decent human being, so you'd be happier with a pet.

Match each statement to the argument type it applies to. 1) Deductive arguments only 2) Inductive arguments only 3) Both deductive and inductive arguments 4)Neither deductive nor inductive arguments A. This type of argument is only useful for scientific reasoning. B. This type of argument can be used to generate new knowledge. C. In this type of argument, statements are presented in support of a conclusion. D. In this type of argument, the conclusion is implicitly stated in the premises.

1) Deductive arguments only -> D 2) Inductive arguments only -> B 3) Both deductive and inductive arguments -> C 4)Neither deductive nor inductive arguments -> A

affirming the antecedent

A conditional syllogism of the following form: If p, then q; p; therefore, q. The antecedent, p, is affirmed in the second premise. This is a valid form of conditional syllogism.

Slippery Slope

A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented

Appeal to Ignorance

A fallacy that uses an opponent's inability to disprove a conclusion as proof of the conclusion's correctness.

In the list of statements about the following argument by analogy, identify any relevant dissimilarities: Going to elementary school is like having a job: for a set number of hours, people with authority instruct you to do specific things, and you are rewarded for following their instructions responsibly. It's acceptable for a workplace to require its employees to wear uniforms, so it's acceptable for an elementary school to require its students to wear uniforms, too.

Elementary schools are intended to provide students with a well-rounded education that includes socialization, while employment is not expected to perform this role.

Denying the Antecedent

If P then Q Not P Therefore, not Q INVALID

Affirming the Consequent

If P then Q Q Therefore P INVALID

Identify which of the following is a valid chain argument. If an important soccer game is on, Julia goes to the sports bar. Whenever Julia goes to the sports bar, she has a beer or two. Therefore, if an important soccer game is on, Julia has a beer or two.

If an important soccer game is on, Julia goes to the sports bar. Whenever Julia goes to the sports bar, she has a beer or two. Therefore, if an important soccer game is on, Julia has a beer or two.