Question 1

In your own words, explain the process of evaluating an argument by analogy.

Accepted Answer

Evaluating an argument by analogy involv

Question 2

Drawing an analogy between an argument and a different, clearly flawed argument is called refutation by logical analogy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 3

Give your own example of a refutation by logical analogy, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Accepted Answer

Sure! Here's an example of a refutation

Question 4

Which of the following concepts is critical to evaluating arguments by analogy?

Accepted Answer

A)  Relative similarity. 
B)  Sufficiency. 
C)  Supererogation. 
D)  Relevant similarity. 
A)  Relative similarity. 
B)  Sufficiency. 
C)  Supererogation. 
D)  Relevant similarity.

Question 5

Judith Jarvis Thomson uses an argument about a burglar who climbs through an open window as part of a refutation by logical analogy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 6

Peter Singer responds to objections to the DROWNING CHILD argument using an evolving analogy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 7

In your own words, explain the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7. What is one seemingly relevant difference that you see between the two actions being compared in that argument? How might you change the analogy to eliminate that difference?

Accepted Answer

The DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter

Question 8

Critics often respond to the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7 by pointing out differences between the case of the child drowning in a pond and the case of children dying from poverty in distant countries. How does Peter Singer respond when people point out those differences?

Accepted Answer

A)  He "bites the bullet" and admits that the conclusion holds despite those morally relevant differences. 
B)  He insists that his moral intuition is that those differences are not morally relevant. 
C)  He changes the scenario in the analogy to eliminate those differences (e.g., by adding other people near the pond who could help). 
D)  He points out that such differences do not undermine the point about having obligations to save people in your own community. 
A)  He "bites the bullet" and admits that the conclusion holds despite those morally relevant differences. 
B)  He insists that his moral intuition is that those differences are not morally relevant. 
C)  He changes the scenario in the analogy to eliminate those differences (e.g., by adding other people near the pond who could help). 
D)  He points out that such differences do not undermine the point about having obligations to save people in your own community.

Question 9

According to Chapter 7, comparing an action to something especially horrific, such as slavery or the Nazis, is:

Accepted Answer

A)  Not likely to lead to a cogent argument because the relevant differences will outweigh the relevant similarities. 
B)  Likely to lead to a cogent argument because it will lead people who were inclined to agree with your conclusion to feel more strongly about that conclusion. 
C)  Likely to lead to a cogent argument because the horrific thing is so clearly morally wrong. 
D)  Not likely to lead to a cogent argument because the argument will make people feel like they're being manipulated. 
A)  Not likely to lead to a cogent argument because the relevant differences will outweigh the relevant similarities. 
B)  Likely to lead to a cogent argument because it will lead people who were inclined to agree with your conclusion to feel more strongly about that conclusion. 
C)  Likely to lead to a cogent argument because the horrific thing is so clearly morally wrong. 
D)  Not likely to lead to a cogent argument because the argument will make people feel like they're being manipulated.

Question 10

Which of the following best captures Judith Jarvis Thomson's response to the UNPROTECTED SEX argument against abortion?

Accepted Answer

A)  UNPROTECTED SEX is a cogent argument but it only applies to women who recognized that their actions involved a risk of pregnancy and failed to take steps to prevent pregnancy. 
B)  UNPROTECTED SEX is not cogent because it fails to account for women who were misled into thinking that their sexual partner was infertile or was going to use a condom. 
C)  UNPROTECTED SEX is not cogent because it is relevantly similar to the argument that if a burglar enters your apartment because you left the window open, you may not evict him because you are partially responsible for his presence there. 
D)  UNPROTECTED SEX is a cogent argument but it does not apply to women who were willing to get pregnant at the time they had unprotected sex but later changed their mind because of changes in their life circumstances. 
A)  UNPROTECTED SEX is a cogent argument but it only applies to women who recognized that their actions involved a risk of pregnancy and failed to take steps to prevent pregnancy. 
B)  UNPROTECTED SEX is not cogent because it fails to account for women who were misled into thinking that their sexual partner was infertile or was going to use a condom. 
C)  UNPROTECTED SEX is not cogent because it is relevantly similar to the argument that if a burglar enters your apartment because you left the window open, you may not evict him because you are partially responsible for his presence there. 
D)  UNPROTECTED SEX is a cogent argument but it does not apply to women who were willing to get pregnant at the time they had unprotected sex but later changed their mind because of changes in their life circumstances.

Question 11

A moral argument by analogy argues that because one action is relevantly similar to another action and the other action has a particular moral property (e.g., moral permissibility or moral wrongness), the first action also has that same moral property.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 12

What is an "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7?

Accepted Answer

A)  An argument by analogy that compares an action to some natural process, such as evolution. 
B)  A series of arguments by analogy that begin with a simple analogy and gradually make it more complicated to better reflect the real world. 
C)  A kind of argument by analogy that focuses on the way an action, process, or institution develops over time. 
D)  A set of arguments by analogy that all resemble each other, which can be used together to make an argument about another set of actions. 
A)  An argument by analogy that compares an action to some natural process, such as evolution. 
B)  A series of arguments by analogy that begin with a simple analogy and gradually make it more complicated to better reflect the real world. 
C)  A kind of argument by analogy that focuses on the way an action, process, or institution develops over time. 
D)  A set of arguments by analogy that all resemble each other, which can be used together to make an argument about another set of actions.

Question 13

Arguments by analogy only work when comparing identical actions performed by different people.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 14

To what does Judith Jarvis Thomson compare unprotected sex in her refutation of the claim that it is always wrong for a woman to get an abortion if she became pregnant as a result of unprotected sex?

Accepted Answer

A)  Leaving the window to your apartment open. 
B)  Buying a lottery ticket. 
C)  Going for a joyride in a fast car. 
D)  Russian roulette. 
A)  Leaving the window to your apartment open. 
B)  Buying a lottery ticket. 
C)  Going for a joyride in a fast car. 
D)  Russian roulette.

Question 15

A refutation by logical analogy only works against arguments by analogy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 16

Which of the following best captures the process of evaluating an argument by analogy?

Accepted Answer

A)  Consider all of the relevant similarities to determine whether they are strong enough to establish the argument's conclusion. 
B)  Brainstorm every possible similarity between the two actions to determine whether there are enough to outweigh the differences. 
C)  Count the number of similarities and differences to see whether the actions are more similar or more different. 
D)  Consider all of the relevant similarities and differences between the two actions to determine whether the similarities outweigh the differences. 
A)  Consider all of the relevant similarities to determine whether they are strong enough to establish the argument's conclusion. 
B)  Brainstorm every possible similarity between the two actions to determine whether there are enough to outweigh the differences. 
C)  Count the number of similarities and differences to see whether the actions are more similar or more different. 
D)  Consider all of the relevant similarities and differences between the two actions to determine whether the similarities outweigh the differences.

Question 17

What is a refutation by logical analogy?

Accepted Answer

A refutation by logical analogy is a met

Question 18

What is a moral argument by analogy? Give an example, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Accepted Answer

A moral argument by analogy is a type of

Question 19

Any successful objection to an argument by analogy is called a refutation by logical analogy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 20

An "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7, is a series of arguments by analogy that become gradually more complicated to reflect the complexity of the real world.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

In your own words, explain the process of evaluating an argument by analogy.

Drawing an analogy between an argument and a different, clearly flawed argument is called refutation by logical analogy.

Give your own example of a refutation by logical analogy, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Which of the following concepts is critical to evaluating arguments by analogy?

Judith Jarvis Thomson uses an argument about a burglar who climbs through an open window as part of a refutation by logical analogy.

Peter Singer responds to objections to the DROWNING CHILD argument using an evolving analogy.

In your own words, explain the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7. What is one seemingly relevant difference that you see between the two actions being compared in that argument? How might you change the analogy to eliminate that difference?

Critics often respond to the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7 by pointing out differences between the case of the child drowning in a pond and the case of children dying from poverty in distant countries. How does Peter Singer respond when people point out those differences?

According to Chapter 7, comparing an action to something especially horrific, such as slavery or the Nazis, is:

Which of the following best captures Judith Jarvis Thomson's response to the UNPROTECTED SEX argument against abortion?

A moral argument by analogy argues that because one action is relevantly similar to another action and the other action has a particular moral property (e.g., moral permissibility or moral wrongness), the first action also has that same moral property.

What is an "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7?

Arguments by analogy only work when comparing identical actions performed by different people.

To what does Judith Jarvis Thomson compare unprotected sex in her refutation of the claim that it is always wrong for a woman to get an abortion if she became pregnant as a result of unprotected sex?

A refutation by logical analogy only works against arguments by analogy.

Which of the following best captures the process of evaluating an argument by analogy?

What is a refutation by logical analogy?

What is a moral argument by analogy? Give an example, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Any successful objection to an argument by analogy is called a refutation by logical analogy.

An "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7, is a series of arguments by analogy that become gradually more complicated to reflect the complexity of the real world.

An Introduction to Arguments

Moral Arguments

Reasoning With Obligations

Reasoning About Consequences

Reasoning With Virtues and Vices

Reasoning With Principles and Counterexamples

Answering Moral Questions

Skepticism, Subjectivism, and Relativism

Religion and Moral Reasoning

Normative Theories, Part 1

Normative Theories, Part 2

Aristotle's Ethics: Exploring Virtue and Justice

Filters

Exam 7: Reasoning With Analogies

In your own words, explain the process of evaluating an argument by analogy.

Drawing an analogy between an argument and a different, clearly flawed argument is called refutation by logical analogy.

Give your own example of a refutation by logical analogy, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Which of the following concepts is critical to evaluating arguments by analogy?

Judith Jarvis Thomson uses an argument about a burglar who climbs through an open window as part of a refutation by logical analogy.

Peter Singer responds to objections to the DROWNING CHILD argument using an evolving analogy.

In your own words, explain the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7. What is one seemingly relevant difference that you see between the two actions being compared in that argument? How might you change the analogy to eliminate that difference?

Critics often respond to the DROWNING CHILD argument from Chapter 7 by pointing out differences between the case of the child drowning in a pond and the case of children dying from poverty in distant countries. How does Peter Singer respond when people point out those differences?

According to Chapter 7, comparing an action to something especially horrific, such as slavery or the Nazis, is:

Which of the following best captures Judith Jarvis Thomson's response to the UNPROTECTED SEX argument against abortion?

A moral argument by analogy argues that because one action is relevantly similar to another action and the other action has a particular moral property (e.g., moral permissibility or moral wrongness), the first action also has that same moral property.

What is an "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7?

Arguments by analogy only work when comparing identical actions performed by different people.

To what does Judith Jarvis Thomson compare unprotected sex in her refutation of the claim that it is always wrong for a woman to get an abortion if she became pregnant as a result of unprotected sex?

A refutation by logical analogy only works against arguments by analogy.

Which of the following best captures the process of evaluating an argument by analogy?

What is a refutation by logical analogy?

What is a moral argument by analogy? Give an example, other than one that was given in the textbook.

Any successful objection to an argument by analogy is called a refutation by logical analogy.

An "evolving analogy," as explained in Chapter 7, is a series of arguments by analogy that become gradually more complicated to reflect the complexity of the real world.

An Introduction to Arguments

Moral Arguments

Reasoning With Obligations

Reasoning About Consequences

Reasoning With Virtues and Vices

Reasoning With Principles and Counterexamples

Answering Moral Questions

Skepticism, Subjectivism, and Relativism

Religion and Moral Reasoning

Normative Theories, Part 1

Normative Theories, Part 2

Aristotle's Ethics: Exploring Virtue and Justice

Filters