1. What skill does a student need for critical thinking?
To present evidence in an order that contributes to a persuasive argument
To separate fact from opinion
To construct and evaluate claims and arguments independently of their power to win a following
To select the strongest set of supporting data
All of the above
6. What is the first step in trying to understand arguments?
To isolate the argument from nonargumentative materials attached to it
To find and eliminate elements of confusion
To find and identify the conclusion or thesis of the passage
To determine the intentions of the author
To research background information on the issues
11. (TCOs 1, 7) What is the purpose of the rhetorical device called a proof surrogate? (Points : 4)
A claim for the validity of a euphemism
A suggestion that there is evidence or authority for a claim without actually citing it
A claim that proof has actually been achieved in the past
A replacement of one author or speaker by one with greater recognition
A legal process of claim by precedent
13. (TCOs 6, 7, 8) To the overall topic of burden of proof, what is the purpose of the rule called initial plausibility? (Points : 4)
The initial response of listeners or readers based on their background information
The plain and common sense of a claim when first presented
The greater burden of proof placed on someone who asserts a claim
The status of being the first claim or argument presented when a controversy begins
The greater burden of proof placed upon the first person to try to refute an argument
Question 14. 14. (TCOs 1, 2) About what does a categorical claim say something? (Points : 4)
The burden of proof
A shared interest in the outcome
The orderly processes of biology
The primary documents of early philosophers
Classes of things
17. (TCOs 2, 3, 4) Logical relationships between corresponding claims of standard-form categorical logic are illustrated in the graphic square of opposition. What is known about two claims when they are called contrary claims? (Points : 4)
They cannot share the same subject term.
They can both be false but they cannot both be true.
They never share the same truth values.
They are not in the same standard form.
They can both be true.
Question 19. 19. (TCOs 2, 5) What question is addressed in concerns for bias in sampling? (Points : 4)
Is the sample size large enough to overcome issues of random sampling of a diverse target population?
What exactly is the feature in the target population that needs to be carefully included in the sample?
Is there sufficient probability that the conclusion will support a hypothesis about the target population?
Is there sufficient probability that the conclusion will support a hypothesis about the sample?
Is any related factor present in the sample in a frequency different from what we would expect to find in the target population?
Question 20. 20. (TCOs 2, 5) What question is asked about the size of a sample in a study? (Points : 4)
Is the sample limited to persons with a vested interest in the outcome?
Is the sample large enough to reflect the diverse array of factors in the population that might affect the presence or absence of the feature we are interested in?
Have we enough resources of personnel and money to work through the study well and on time?
Is the sampling error rate acceptable?
Is the sample small enough that we can handle the study and give it enough attention to detail?
Question 21. 21. (TCOs 1, 5, 8, 9) What is the inductive "fallacy of biased generalizing"? (Points : 4)
Being overconfident of how likely a biased sample makes a conclusion
Rushing to judgment with hasty analysis of sampled data
The result of underestimated sample size
The result of not accounting for cultural factors in choosing a sample
Another name for the fallacy of hasty generalization
24. (TCOs 2, 6) The ethical notion of moral relativism follows which concept? (Points : 4)
That what is right or wrong differs from group to group and culture to culture
That ethical freedom is shown by one's differing from the values of his or her group or culture
That the idea of what is right and wrong depends and is determined by one's group or culture
That right and wrong is merely a subjective question of personal opinion
That self-interest is the one fixed ethical factor
3. (TCOs 2, 4) Explain in what way the thinking of the following statement is wrong or defective. Give reasons for your judgment.
There must be something to palm reading. Millions of people believe in it. (Points : 10)
Question 4. 4. (TCOs 3, 9) Moral relativism is the belief that what is right or wrong may differ from group to group, or culture to culture. What are the difficulties of moral relativism? (Points : 10)
Question 5. 5. (TCOs 6, 7, 9) Here is a short essay about an investigation.
Here are also four questions/tasks write a paragraph to answer each one of them:
1. Identify the causal hypothesis at issue.
2. Identify what kind of investigation it is.
3. There are control and experimental groups. State the difference in effect (or cause) between the control and experimental groups.
4. State the conclusion that you think is warranted by the report.
Does jogging keep you healthy? Two independent researchers interested in whether exercise prevents colds interviewed 20 volunteers about the frequency with which they caught colds. The volunteers, none of who exercised regularly, were then divided into two groups of 10, and one group participated in a six-month regimen of jogging three miles every other day. At the end of the six months, the frequency of colds among the joggers was compared both with that of the nonjoggers and with that of the joggers prior to the experiment. It was found that, compared with the nonjoggers, the joggers had 25% fewer colds. The record of colds among the joggers also declined in comparison with their own record prior to the exercise program. (Points : 30)
Question 6. 6. (TCOs 3, 4, 6) Read this passage below. When you have done so, answer these three questions, writing a paragraph for each question. Your three questions are:
1. What position does the author take on the issue at hand?
2. If the author is supporting a position with an argument, restate the argument in your own words.
3. What rhetorical devices does the author employ in this text?
The Passage:
"Another quality that makes [Texas Republican and former Congressman] Tom DeLay an un-Texas politician is that he's mean. By and large, Texas pols are an agreeable set of less-than-perfect humans and quite often well-intentioned. As Carl Parker of Port Arthur used to observe, if you took all the fools out of the [Congress], it would not be a representative body any longer. The old sense of collegiality was strong, and vindictive behavior punishing pols for partisan reasons was simply not done. But those are Tom DeLay's specialties, his trademarks. The Hammer is not only genuinely feared in Washington, he is, I'm sorry to say, hated."
-excerpt from a column by Molly Ivins, Ft. Worth Star-Telegram (Points : 30)
Question 7. 7. (TCOs 7, 8) Read this passage below. When you have done so, answer the question in at least one full paragraph, giving specific reasons.
The Passage:
One day, out of frustration, your roommate rips several pages out of his or her textbook, rolls them up, and throws them across the room. You go to pick up the pages. "Leave them," your roommate insists. "It says something. It's art." "It's garbage," you reply. Who is right? (Points : 20)
Question 8. 8. (TCOs 6, 7, 9) Read this passage below. When you have done so, answer these three questions, writing a paragraph for each question.
Your three questions are as follows.
1. What premises is the author using?
2. What conclusions does the author come to?
3. Are the conclusions justified?
Either one thinks that there is no reason for believing any political doctrine or one sees some reason, however shaky, for the commitment of politics. If a person believes that political doctrines are void of content, that person will be quite content to see political debates go on, but won't expect anything useful to come from them. If we consider the other case that there is a patriotic justification for a political belief, then what? If the belief is that a specific political position is true, then one ought to be intolerant of all other political beliefs, since each political position must be held to be false relative to the belief one has. And since each political position holds out the promise of reward for any probability of its fixing social problems, however small, that makes it seem rational to choose it over its alternatives. The trouble, of course, is that the people who have other political doctrines may hold theirs just as strongly, making strength of belief itself invalid as a way to determine the rightness of a political position