Chapter 5 faulty reasoning

1. 1[blank_start]fallacy[blank_end] is an argument form that both [blank_start]common[blank_end] and defective or recurring mistake in [blank_start]reasoning[blank_end]

   1. Afallacy
   2. Bcommon
   3. Creasoning
2. 2Fallacies are [blank_start]convincing[blank_end] and it seems [blank_start]plausible[blank_end]

   1. Aconvincing
   2. Bplausible
3. 3Fallacies are time and psychologically [blank_start]persuasive[blank_end] but logically [blank_start]impotent[blank_end]

   1. Apersuasive
   2. Bimpotent
4. 4The primary reason for studying fallacies is to be able to [blank_start]detect[blank_end] them so that you are not [blank_start]taken[blank_end] in by them

   1. Adetect
   2. Btaken
5. 5Fallacies can be divided into [blank_start]two[blank_end] broad categories:
   1. [blank_start]irrelevant[blank_end] premises
   2. [blank_start]unacceptable[blank_end] premises

   1. Atwo
   2. Birrelevant
   3. Cunacceptable
6. 6[blank_start]Irrelevant[blank_end] premises simply have no bearing on the truth of the [blank_start]conclusion[blank_end] they are supposed to [blank_start]support[blank_end]

   1. AIrrelevant
   2. Bconclusion
   3. Csupport
7. 7[blank_start]Argument[blank_end] may offer reasons to accept a [blank_start]conclusion[blank_end] but [blank_start]reasons[blank_end] have nothing to do with the conclusion

   1. AArgument
   2. Bconclusion
   3. Creasons
8. 8Uncapable premises are [blank_start]relevent[blank_end] to the conclusion but are also [blank_start]dubious[blank_end]

   1. Arelevant
   2. Bdubious
9. 9In good argument, premises need to be both [blank_start]relevant[blank_end] and [blank_start]acceptable[blank_end]. In fallacious argument both or one of these are [blank_start]missing[blank_end].

   1. Arelevant
   2. Bacceptable
   3. Cmissing
10. 10[blank_start]Genetic[blank_end] fallacy is the fallacy of arguing that a claim is true or false solely because of its [blank_start]origin[blank_end]

    1. AGenetic
    2. Borigin

11. 11In most cases, the [blank_start]source[blank_end] of an idea is [blank_start]irrelevant[blank_end] to its truth

    1. Asource
    2. Birrelevant
12. 12[blank_start]Good[blank_end] idea can come from [blank_start]questionable[blank_end] source or bad idea can come from [blank_start]impeccable[blank_end] source.

    1. AGood
    2. Bquestionable
    3. Cimpeccable
13. 13[blank_start]Judging[blank_end] a claim only by its source is recipe of [blank_start]error[blank_end]

    1. AJudging
    2. Berror
14. 14Appeal to the person's another name is [blank_start]ad hominem[blank_end]

    1. Aad hominem
15. 15Appeal to the [blank_start]person[blank_end] is the fallacy of [blank_start]rejecting[blank_end] a claim by criticizing the [blank_start]person[blank_end] who makes it rather than the [blank_start]claim[blank_end] itself

    1. Aperson
    2. Brejecting
    3. Cperson
    4. Dclaim
16. 16Ad hominem means "[blank_start]to the man[blank_end]"

    1. Ato the man
17. 17Appeal to the person is a fallacy because attempt to [blank_start]discredit[blank_end] a claim by appealing to something that's almost always irrelevant to it, such as a [blank_start]person's character[blank_end], [blank_start]motives[blank_end], or [blank_start]personal circumstances[blank_end].

    1. Adiscredit
    2. Bperson's character
    3. Cmotives
    4. Dpersonal circumstances
18. 18[blank_start]Claims[blank_end] must be judged by their own merits but they are not guilty by [blank_start]association[blank_end]

    1. AClaims
    2. Bassociation
19. 19We cannot reject a claim because of a [blank_start]person's fault[blank_end] unless we can show how a [blank_start]person's faults[blank_end] translate into faults in the [blank_start]claim[blank_end]

    1. Aperson's fault
    2. Bclaim
    3. Cperson's faults
20. 20A person's [blank_start]dubious character[blank_end] does not decide if the claim is true or false

    1. Adubious character
21. 21The fallacy "appeal to the person" is usually regarded as a special case of the [blank_start]genetic fallacy[blank_end]

    1. Agenetic fallacy
22. 22Appeal to the person is not only mentions a person as the [blank_start]origin[blank_end] of an argument, but also attacks [blank_start]the person[blank_end] and usually ignores the [blank_start]argument[blank_end] altogather.

    1. Aorigin
    2. Bthe person
    3. Cargument
23. 23The fallacy [blank_start]appeal to the person[blank_end] comes in various form. One of them is [blank_start]personal attack[blank_end] which often simply consists of [blank_start]insults[blank_end].

    1. Aappeal to the person
    2. Bpersonal attack
    3. Cinsults
24. 24Another form of appeal to the person is the person's [blank_start]circumstances[blank_end]

    1. Acircumstances
25. 25Someone who making a claim is accused of [blank_start]inconsistency[blank_end] specially maintaining a [blank_start]view[blank_end] that is inconsistent with his or her previous views of [blank_start]social[blank_end] or [blank_start]political commitment[blank_end]

    1. Ainconsistency
    2. Bview
    3. Csocial
    4. Dpolitical commitment
26. 26Another form of ad hominem is "[blank_start]Tu quoque[blank_end]" that means "[blank_start]you are another[blank_end]"

    1. ATu quoque
    2. Byou are another
27. 27Tu queue is type of [blank_start]ad hominem[blank_end] fallacy that argues that a claim must be true or false because the claimant is [blank_start]hypocritical[blank_end]

    1. Aad hominem
    2. Bhypocritical
28. 28We cannot reject or accept a claim because someone is [blank_start]hypocritical[blank_end]. If we to consider their hypocrisy their views must fall on their own [blank_start]merits[blank_end].

    1. Ahypocritical
    2. Bmerits
29. 29In another form of [blank_start]circumstantial[blank_end] ad hominem reasoning, someone might deduce that a claim is [blank_start]false[blank_end] because the [blank_start]person[blank_end] making it, given his or her [blank_start]circumstances[blank_end] would be expected to make it.

    1. Acircumstantial
    2. Bfalse
    3. Cperson
    4. Dcircumstances
30. 30Ad hominem tactics names as [blank_start]poison the well[blank_end]

    1. Apoison the well
31. 31The idea of poison the well is, as you cannot get [blank_start]safe water[blank_end] out of the poisonous well, you cannot get [blank_start]reliable claims[blank_end] out of discredited [blank_start]claimant[blank_end].

    1. Asafe water
    2. Breliable claims
    3. Cclaimant
32. 32Just because someone might have [blank_start]dubious[blank_end] reason to make a claim does not mean it is a [blank_start]false claim[blank_end] neither it means that everything comes out of the poisonous well will be [blank_start]dismissed[blank_end].

    1. Adubious
    2. Bfalse claim
    3. Cdismissed
33. 33[blank_start]Composition[blank_end] is the fallacy of arguing that what is true of the [blank_start]parts[blank_end] must be true of the whole.

    1. AComposition
    2. Bparts
34. 34In the fallacy of composition, the error is thinking that the [blank_start]characteristics of the parts[blank_end] are somehow transferred to the whole. something that is not always the case.

    1. Acharacteristics of the parts
35. 35A fallacy of composition always shows up in [blank_start]statistical arguments[blank_end].

    1. Astatistical arguments
36. 36[blank_start]Division[blank_end] is the fallacy of arguing that what is true of the [blank_start]whole[blank_end] must be true of the parts

    1. ADivision
    2. Bwhole
37. 37The fallacy of division, the error is thinking that characteristics of the [blank_start]whole[blank_end] must be transferred to the parts or that [blank_start]traits[blank_end] of the group must be the same as traits of [blank_start]individuals[blank_end] in the group.

    1. Awhole
    2. Btraits
    3. Cindividuals
38. 38Fallacy of [blank_start]division[blank_end] used in stastical argument

    1. Adivision
39. 39[blank_start]Equivocation[blank_end] is the fallacy of using a [blank_start]word[blank_end] in two different [blank_start]senses[blank_end] an argument.

    1. AEquivocation
    2. Bword
    3. Csenses
40. 40The fallacy of [blank_start]equavocation[blank_end] occurs whenever a word has [blank_start]one meaning[blank_end] in one premise and another meaning in another premise or the [blank_start]conclusion[blank_end].

    1. Aequavocation
    2. Bone meaning
    3. Cconclusion
41. 41Appeal to [blank_start]common practice[blank_end], the fallacy of accepting or rejecting a claim solely on the basis of what [blank_start]groups of people[blank_end] generally [blank_start]do[blank_end] or how they [blank_start]behave[blank_end] (when the action or behavior is [blank_start]irrelevant[blank_end] to the truth of the [blank_start]claim[blank_end])

    1. Acommon practice
    2. Bgroups of people
    3. Cdo
    4. Dbehave
    5. Eirrelevant
    6. Fclaim
42. 42The fact that a lot of [blank_start]people[blank_end] do something is generally not an [blank_start]indication[blank_end] that its ethical, polite, or wise for you to do it.

    1. Aindication
    2. Bpeople
43. 43Appeal to popularity means "[blank_start]to the masses[blank_end]"

    1. Ato the masses
44. 44Appeal to [blank_start]popularity[blank_end] is the fallacy of arguing that a claim must be true merely because a [blank_start]substantial[blank_end] number of [blank_start]people[blank_end] believe that

    1. Apopularity
    2. Bsubstantial
    3. Cpeople
45. 45Patterns of [blank_start]appeal to popularity[blank_end]:
    Everyone believes X, so X must be true.

    1. Aappeal to popularity
46. 46As far as [blank_start]truth[blank_end] of a claim is [blank_start]concerned[blank_end], what many people believe is [blank_start]irrelevant[blank_end].

    1. Aconcerned
    2. Birrelevant
    3. Ctruth
47. 47[blank_start]Large groups[blank_end] of people are no more [blank_start]infallible[blank_end] than an individual is

    1. ALarge groups
    2. Binfallible
48. 48What many people [blank_start]believe[blank_end], can be an indication of [blank_start]truth[blank_end] if they are [blank_start]experts[blank_end] or have expert's [blank_start]knowledge[blank_end] in the issue at hand.

    1. Abelieve
    2. Btruth
    3. Cexperts
    4. Dknowledge
49. 49Appeal to [blank_start]tradition[blank_end] is the fallacy of arguing that a claim must be true just because it is part of the [blank_start]tradition[blank_end].

    1. Atradition
    2. Btradition
50. 50Appeal to the tradition is fallacious because of [blank_start]tradition[blank_end] like the [blank_start]masses[blank_end], can be [blank_start]wrong[blank_end]

    1. Atradition
    2. Bmasses
    3. Cwrong
51. 51It is also not reasonable to automatically [blank_start]reject[blank_end] a claim because it's [blank_start]traditional[blank_end].

    1. Areject
    2. Btraditional
52. 52A [blank_start]tradition[blank_end] should be neither accpeted nor rejected without good reason

    1. Atradition
53. 53Kneejerk [blank_start]acceptance[blank_end] of tradition is as bad as kneejer [blank_start]rejection[blank_end]

    1. Arejection
    2. Bacceptance
54. 54Appeal to the [blank_start]ignorance[blank_end] is the fallacy of arguing that a lack of [blank_start]evidence[blank_end] proves something

    1. Aignorance
    2. Bevidence
55. 55There are two types of the appeal to the [blank_start]ignorance[blank_end]:
    1. The problem arises by thinking that a [blank_start]claim[blank_end] must be true because it has not been shown to be [blank_start]false[blank_end].
    2. The break down in [blank_start]logic[blank_end] comes when you argue that a claim must be [blank_start]false[blank_end] because it has not been proven to be true.

    1. Alogic
    2. Bfalse
    3. Cclaim
    4. Dfalse
    5. Eignorance
56. 56A [blank_start]lack of evidence[blank_end] alone can neither prove nor disprove a [blank_start]proposition[blank_end]. A lack of evidence simply [blank_start]reveals[blank_end] our [blank_start]ignorance[blank_end] about something.

    1. Aproposition
    2. Black of evidence
    3. Creveals
    4. Dignorance
57. 57Sometimes when we carefully [blank_start]search[blank_end] for something and such a thorough search is likely to [blank_start]uncover[blank_end] it if there is anything to uncover, the [blank_start]failure[blank_end] to find what we are looking for can show that it probably is not there. This kind of [blank_start]inductive[blank_end] reasoning is widespread in [blank_start]sceience[blank_end].

    1. Asearch
    2. Buncover
    3. Cfailure
    4. Dinductive
    5. Escience
58. 58The weight of [blank_start]evidence or argument[blank_end] required by [blank_start]one side[blank_end] in a debate or disagreement is called [blank_start]burden of proof[blank_end]

    1. Aevidence or argument
    2. Bone side
    3. Cburden of proof
59. 59The [blank_start]burden of proof[blank_end] rests on the side that makes a [blank_start]positive[blank_end] claim - an [blank_start]assertion[blank_end] that something exists or is the [blank_start]case[blank_end], rather than that something does not [blank_start]exist[blank_end] or is not the case

    1. Aburden of proof
    2. Bpositive
    3. Cassertion
    4. Dexist
    5. Ecase
60. 60If a person or the claimant makes an [blank_start]unsupported positive claim[blank_end], he or she must provide for it if the claim is to be [blank_start]accepted[blank_end]

    1. Aunsupported positive claim
    2. Baccepted
61. 61if the [blank_start]claimant[blank_end] does give you reasons for [blank_start]accepting[blank_end] the claim, you can either accept them or reject them. If you reject them, you are [blank_start]obligated[blank_end] to explain the [blank_start]reasons[blank_end] for your rejection.

    1. Aclaimant
    2. Baccepting
    3. Cobligated
    4. Dreasons
62. 62Appeal to [blank_start]emotion[blank_end] is the fallacy of using emotions in place of [blank_start]relevant reasons[blank_end] as premises in an argument
    
    
    
    
    
    

    1. Aemotion
    2. Brelevant reasons
63. 63Appeal to the [blank_start]emotion[blank_end] consists of trying to [blank_start]persuade[blank_end] someone of a conclusion solely by [blank_start]arousing[blank_end] his or her feelings rather than [blank_start]presenting[blank_end] relavant [blank_start]reasons[blank_end]

    1. Aemotion
    2. Bpersuade
    3. Carousing
    4. Dpresenting
    5. Ereasons
64. 64When you use appeal to emotion fallacy, you appeal to people's [blank_start]guilt[blank_end], [blank_start]anger[blank_end], [blank_start]pity[blank_end], [blank_start]fear[blank_end], [blank_start]compassion[blank_end], [blank_start]resentment[blank_end], [blank_start]pride[blank_end] - but not good reasons that could give [blank_start]logical support[blank_end] to your case

    1. Aguilt
    2. Banger
    3. Cpity
    4. Dfear
    5. Ecompassion
    6. Fresentment
    7. Gpride
    8. Hlogical support
65. 65Wielding of [blank_start]emotion[blank_end] in discourse is an example of [blank_start]rhetoric[blank_end], the use of [blank_start]nonargumentative[blank_end], [blank_start]emotive[blank_end] words, and [blank_start]phrases[blank_end] to persuade or influence an [blank_start]audience[blank_end]

    1. Aemotion
    2. Brhetoric
    3. Cnonargumentative
    4. Demotive
    5. Ephrases
    6. Faudience
66. 66Use of [blank_start]rhetoric[blank_end] is not wrong but its use becomes fallacious when there's an attempt to [blank_start]support[blank_end] a conclusion by [blank_start]rhetoric[blank_end] alone.

    1. Arhetoric
    2. Bsupport
    3. Crhetoric
67. 67[blank_start]Good[blank_end] writers often combine [blank_start]arguments[blank_end] with appeals to [blank_start]emotion[blank_end] in the same piece of writing and no [blank_start]fallacy[blank_end] need to enter the [blank_start]picture[blank_end]

    1. Aarguments
    2. Bemotion
    3. Cfallacy
    4. DGood
    5. Epicture
68. 68A strong argument is [blank_start]presented[blank_end], and its reinforced by [blank_start]strong feelings[blank_end]

    1. Apresented
    2. Bstrong feelings
69. 69The fallacy of [blank_start]red herring[blank_end] is the fallacy of deliberately [blank_start]raising[blank_end] an [blank_start]irrelevant issue[blank_end] during an argument

    1. Araising
    2. Birrelevant issue
    3. Cred herring
70. 70Red herring's pattern is to put forth a [blank_start]claim[blank_end] and then couple it with additional [blank_start]claims[blank_end] that may seem to [blank_start]support[blank_end] it but in fact are mere [blank_start]distraction[blank_end].

    1. Aclaim
    2. Bclaims
    3. Csupport
    4. Ddistraction
71. 71The most blatant fallacy of irrelevance is the [blank_start]red herring[blank_end]

    1. Ared herring
72. 72[blank_start]Red herring[blank_end] gets its name from the practice of dragging a [blank_start]smelly fish[blank_end] across a trail to [blank_start]throw[blank_end] a hunting dog off the [blank_start]scent[blank_end].

    1. ARed herring
    2. Bsmelly fish
    3. Cthrow
    4. Dscent
73. 73In red herring arguer [blank_start]shifts[blank_end] from one topic to [blank_start]another[blank_end] that has no [blank_start]conncetion[blank_end] with the [blank_start]first topic[blank_end]

    1. Ashifts
    2. Banother
    3. Cconncetion
    4. Dfirst topic
74. 74The fallacy of [blank_start]distorting[blank_end], [blank_start]weakening[blank_end] or oversimplifying someone's [blank_start]position[blank_end] so it can be more easily [blank_start]attacked[blank_end] or refuted is called [blank_start]strawman[blank_end] fallacy

    1. Adistorting
    2. Bweakening
    3. Cposition
    4. Dattacked
    5. Estrawman
75. 75A [blank_start]strawman[blank_end] argument distracts the [blank_start]listener[blank_end] by focusing on a [blank_start]distorted version[blank_end] of the [blank_start]target[blank_end] argument, rather than focusing on the [blank_start]argument[blank_end] itself.

    1. Astrawman
    2. Blistener
    3. Cdistorted version
    4. Dtarget
    5. Eargument
76. 76The fallacy of [blank_start]attempting[blank_end] to establish the [blank_start]conclusion[blank_end] of an argument by using that conclusion as a [blank_start]premise[blank_end] is called [blank_start]begging the question[blank_end]

    1. Aattempting
    2. Bconclusion
    3. Cpremise
    4. Dbegging the question
77. 77Begging the question is also called [blank_start]arguing in a circle[blank_end]

    1. Aarguing in a circle
78. 78To [blank_start]beg the question[blank_end] is to argue that a [blank_start]proposition[blank_end] is true because the very [blank_start]same[blank_end] proposition [blank_start]supports[blank_end] it:
    [blank_start]P[blank_end].
    Therefore, P.

    1. Abeg the question
    2. Bproposition
    3. Csupports
    4. Dsame
    5. EP
79. 79The fallacy of [blank_start]asserting[blank_end] that there are only two [blank_start]alternatives[blank_end] to consider when there are actually [blank_start]more than two[blank_end] is called [blank_start]false dilemma[blank_end].

    1. Aasserting
    2. Balternatives
    3. Cmore than two
    4. Dfalse dilemma
80. 80[blank_start]Strawman[blank_end] fallacy pattern:
    Person 1 makes claim Y.
    Person 2 [blank_start]restates[blank_end] person 1’s claim (in a [blank_start]distorted[blank_end] way).
    Person 2 attacks the [blank_start]distorted version[blank_end] of the claim.
    Therefore, claim Y is [blank_start]false[blank_end]

    1. AStrawman
    2. Brestates
    3. Cdistorted version
    4. Ddistorted
    5. Efalse
81. 81The [blank_start]false dilemma[blank_end] is consists of either:
    a) asserting that there are only [blank_start]two alternatives[blank_end] to consider when there are actually [blank_start]more than two[blank_end]
    b) asserting that there are [blank_start]two distinct alternatives[blank_end] that may in fact not be [blank_start]mutually exclusive[blank_end]

    1. Afalse dilemma
    2. Btwo alternatives
    3. Cmore than two
    4. Dtwo distinct alternatives
    5. Emutually exclusive
82. 82A false [blank_start]dillema[blank_end] is a situation where there are [blank_start]two[blank_end] equally undesirable [blank_start]possibilities[blank_end]

    1. Adilemma
    2. Bpossibilities
    3. Ctwo
83. 83Sometimes we encounter stand-alone [blank_start]disjunctive[blank_end] phrases rather than full-blown [blank_start]false dilemma[blank_end] arguments. These are [blank_start]false choice[blank_end] often presented as one-liners or [blank_start]headlines[blank_end] in tabloid newspapers, TV news programs and magazines.

    1. Adisjunctive
    2. Bfalse dilemma
    3. Cfalse choice
    4. Dheadlines

Description

1 Philosophy Quiz on Chapter 5 faulty reasoning, created by Zinia Ahmed on 11/12/2017.

Author

Zinia Ahmed

Language

English

Views

1

Tags

philosophy1

Rating

No ratings yet

Rate this quiz

Rate this quiz

More on Logical Fallacies