Reasoning & Analysis Course Pre-Test
Reportive and Stipulative are two types of:
Definitions
P>Q ~P ___ ~Q is the form of
Denying the Antecedent - Invalid
"Either the garage will be cleaned out or the truck will not fit inside" is an example of a:
Disjunctive Sentence
When we have at least one intermediate conclusion, we have a(n):
Complex Argument
"If the refrigerator door is shut, then the food is cold" is an example of a"
Conditional Sentence
P Q Therefore, P and Q is the form of:
Conjunction
The following are fallacies of Illegitimate Assumption
A & B (False Dilemma & Loaded Question)
What is a syllogism?
A three-lined argument
P>Q Q/P is the form of:
Affirming the Consequence - Invalid
When a researcher is kept in ignorance about which items are labeled as the control group and experiment group, he/she is conducting a:
All of the Above (blind experiment & masked experiment)
Conditions that were present before a switch are known as:
All of the Above (standing conditions, pre-existing conditions, background conditions)
The following are methods of definitions:
All of the Above (synonyms, genus and species, complete enumeration)
The following are fallacies of criticism:
All of the above (Ad hominem, Tu Quoque, Pooh-Pooh, Straw Man)
A deductive argument is one that can be:
Both (valid and invalid)
When you do not know which items are in the experiment and control group, AND you do not know which has received treatment, you are:
Double Blind
The words "and" "but" also" and "nevertheless" can be considered inference indicators.
False
Two formal fallacies are "Denying the Consequent" and "Affirming the Antecedent"
False
An argument's final point is called the
Final Conclusion
If P, then Q If Q, then R Therefore, if P, then R is the form of:
Hypothetical Syloogism
An argument when it is up to the reader/listener/viewer to figure out the meaning or message is a(n):
Implicit Argument
When we have two cases identical in every way, except for the space they occupy, we have a:
Limited Case
If P, then Q P Therefore, Q is the form of:
Modus Ponens
*If P, then Q P Therefore, Q is the form of:
Modus Tollens
When we are shown how subjects differ from one another, we are creating a:
Negative analogy
When we are shown how subjects resemble one another, we are creating a:
Positive Analogy
A reason for a conclusion put forth to defend a thesis or claim is a(n):
Premise
When there is no intermediate conclusion in an argument, we have a(n):
Simple Argument
P and Q Therefore, P is the form of:S\
Simplification
When all premises in a valid argument are true, we have a(n):
Sound Argument
Analytically true statements are also known as:
Tautologies
"Since you never attended four consecutive course meetings, you were dropped from the class" is an example of an argument
True
If P, then Q P Therefore, Q is in Sentential Form
True
The following Venn diagram is correct for the statement "All Avalanches are SUVs" (A bubble is filled in)
True
The following Venn diagram is correct for the statement "All SUVs are Avalanches" (S bubble is filled in)
True
The following Venn diagram is correct for the statement "No Avalanches are SUVs" (middle bubble is filled in)
True
The following Venn diagram is correct for the statement "Some SUVs are Avalances" (asterisk in the middle)
True
The following Venn diagram is correct for the statement "Some SUVs are not Avalanches" (asterisk in the S bubble)
True
Two fallacies of inadequate evidence are "Post Hoc" and "Hasty Generalization"
True
A lack of precision, or being "fuzzy" is also known as:
Vagueness
When there can be different possible meaning, we are referring to:
ambiguity
