Reading Quiz 3: What Is Science II

Consider the following argument: Major Premise: If theory T is correct, all rich countries will be democracies. Minor Premise: All rich countries are democracies. Conclusion: Therefore, theory T is correct What form of categorical syllogism is this?

Affirming the consequent

Consider the following argument: Major Premise: If the president commits a criminal act, then he can be impeached. Minor Premise: The president does not commit a criminal act. Conclusion: Therefore, the president cannot be impeached. What form of categorical syllogism is this?

Denying the antecedent

Consider the following argument. Major Premise: If a country has a strong economy, the government will be popular. Minor Premise: The government is not popular. Conclusion: Therefore, the country does not have a strong economy. What type of categorical syllogism is this?

Denying the consequent

Sometimes it is hard to know whether a statement is scientific or not. Much depends on how we define certain terms. Consider the following statement: All good students get high grades. Is this statement scientific if we define "good students" in terms of a students enthusiasm? Why or why not?

If "good" was defined with reference to students' enthusiasm, then this statement would be scientific.

Consider the following statement: Are the conditions underlined in the following statement necessary or sufficient to produce the effect described below? Countries cannot become democracies unless they are wealthy

Necessary

Sometimes it is hard to know whether a statement is scientific or not. Much depends on how we define certain terms. Consider the following statement: All good students get high grades. Is this statement scientific if we define "good students" in terms of a students' grades? Why or why not?

Not Scientific. If "good" was defined with reference to students' grades, then this statement would be a non-scientific tautology.

Consider the following statement. After looking at the structure of each statement, would you say that the underlined conditions are necessary or sufficient to produce the described effects? Countries always have few parties when they employ majoritarian representation electoral rules.

Sufficient

Consider the following argument. Major Premise: If a country has a strong economy, the government will be popular. Minor Premise: The government is not popular. Conclusion: Therefore, the country does not have a strong economy. Is this argument valid?

The argument is valid

A question is scientific if it is falsifiable. Is the following statement scientific? Why or why not? Smoking increases the probability of getting cancer.

The statement is scientific because the statement could be falsified by observing that there is no connection between smoking and getting cancer or by observing that people who smoke are less likely to get cancer.

Consider the following argument: Major Premise: If theory T is correct, all rich countries will be democracies. Minor Premise: All rich countries are democracies. Conclusion: Therefore, theory T is correct. Is this a valid or invalid argument?

This is an invalid argument.

Consider the following argument: Major Premise: If a country employs a proportional representation electoral rules, then it will have many parties. Minor Premise: Spain does not employ proportional representation electoral rules. Conclusion: Therefore, Spain does not have many parties. Is this a valid or invalid argument?

This is an invalid argument.

Consider the following argument: Major Premise: If the president commits a criminal act, then he can be impeached. Minor Premise: The president does not commit a criminal act. Conclusion: Therefore, the president cannot be impeached. Is this a valid or invalid argument?

This is an invalid argument.