Deck 7: How Do I Reason With My Audience

Question 1

The reasoning process in argumentation is most commonly found in the warrant step in the Toulmin model.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

When we reason, we make inferences about the relationship between the grounds and the claim these grounds support.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Argument from cause suggests a temporal connection between events in which one comes before the other.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

"Since the Pegasus, a wide bodied jetliner with serious design flaws, has a record of crashing more frequently than any other wide bodied commercial jetliner, we are safe in assuming that these crashes are caused by design flaws," is an example of argument from sign.

Question 5

In testing the validity of the argument provided in question 4, we would attempt to determine if the cause, design flaws, was sufficient to produce the effect, crashes.

Question 6

In testing the validity of the argument provided in question 4, we would attempt to determine if other factors, such as weather or pilot error, might impede or negate establishment of a causal relationship between design flaws and crashes.

Question 7

Any two phenomena that occur in sequence possess a cause-effect relationship to each other.

Question 8

Causes are observable symptoms, conditions, or marks used to prove that a certain state of affairs exists.

Question 9

Statistics are often interpreted through sign reasoning.

Question 10

Argument from sign analyzes a situation, while argument from cause describes a situation.

Question 11

A generalization is a form of deductive reasoning.

Question 12

When you make a generalization, you look at the details of examples, specific cases, and occurrences and infer that what is true of them is true of the entire class they represent.

Question 13

Generalizations reason that, on the basis of two or more similar events or cases, what is true of case one will also be true of case two.

Question 14

"Since the Pegasus, a wide bodied commercial jetliner has been shown to have serious design flaws, it is reasonable to assume that other wide bodied commercial jetliners, such as the Valkyrie, have serious design flaws," is an example of argument from parallel case.

Question 15

The strength of the argument offered in question 14 would rest on the extent to which the two aircraft are similar. Insofar as they are different, the argument is weakened.

Question 16

Argument from parallel case is just another name for argument from analogy.

Question 17

Argument from analogy is one of the strongest forms of argument.

Question 18

Analogies are most useful in illustrating, clarifying, or making an argument more memorable or striking.

Question 19

Argument from authority relies on the credibility and expertise of the source to warrant acceptance of a claim.

Question 20

Arguments from dilemma are built with two or more arguments from cause that embody undesirable consequences.

Question 21

In reasoning from , phenomena are connected along a time line, the one which occurs first acts as the generative agent which brings the second into being.

A)definition
B)dilemma
C)cause
D)sign

Question 22

What type of reasoning is used in the following argument?
There is every reason to believe that the concussion crisis in NFL football will get worse. The speed and size of professional athletes have made American football more dangerous. Offensive linemen now average nearly 315 pounds-65 more pounds than they did 30 years ago. They launch that weight from a three-point stance, headfirst, at opposing linemen of nearly the same size. The impact of two such massive players produces a concussion in the cranium when the brain bangs against the skull. Professor of Neurology at Boston University, Dr. Ann McKee, notes, "when helmets clash, the head decelerates instantly, yet the brain continues to lurch forward, like a driver who jams the brakes on. Even though the skull is protected by a helmet, the brain itself is still in motion and a concussion is often the result."

A)Argument from dilemma.
B)Argument from authority.
C)Argument from cause.
D)Argument from generalization.

Question 23

In testing the validity of the argument in question 2, you would be well advised to ask

A)is the asserted relationship between the grounds and the effect consistent, or are there instances in which the effect has not followed from these grounds?
B)are sufficient case or instances cited as grounds to ensure the reliability of the generalization?
C)how similar are the cases cited and are the similarities cited key factors?
D)is this truly an either-or situation?

Question 24

Which of the following is NOT a test of argument from cause?

A)Is the cause capable of producing the effect?
B)Is the effect produced by the cause or did it occur coincidentally with the cause?
C)Can the symptom in question be taken as reliable?
D)Has such an effect always followed such a cause?

Question 25

Reasoning from relies on observable symptoms, conditions, or marks that tell us what is the case.

A)parallel case
B)analogy
C)generalization
D)sign

Question 26

The following argument is an example of reasoning. CLAIM: Athletes receive preferential treatment in some classes.
GROUNDS: Members of the football team are allowed to miss classes without incurring the penalties imposed on non-athletes who miss classes.
WARRANT: These conditions suggest preferential treatment of the athlete over the non- athlete by some professors.
BACKING: Preferential treatment in the classroom is commonly recognized as being allowed to miss classes without penalty and being allowed extra time for exams.

A)cause
B)sign
C)generalization
D)parallel case

Question 27

In testing the validity of the argument in question 6, you would be well advised to ask

A)do the grounds reliably point to the conclusion drawn and not some alternative conclusion?
B)are sufficient case or instances cited as grounds to ensure the reliability of the generalization?
C)how similar are the cases cited and are the similarities cited key factors?
D)is this truly an either-or situation?

Question 28

Reasoning from relies upon whether or not the condition or mark cited can be taken as reliable proof.

A)cause
B)sign
C)parallel case
D)generalization

Question 29

Which of the following is a test of argument from sign?

A)Is the sign capable of producing the effect?
B)Is the effect produced by the sign or did it occur coincidentally with the sign?
C)Can the sign in question be taken as reliable?
D)Has such an effect always followed such a sign?

Question 30

Reasoning from is a form of induction which uses the details of examples, specific cases, or situations and makes predictions about an entire class.

A)parallel case
B)analogy
C)generalization
D)sign

Question 31

Which of the following is NOT a test of argument from generalization?

A)Have a sufficient number of cases or instances been cited?
B)Are the instances cited representative of all members of the group?
C)Are the cases similar in important, non-trivial factors?
D)Are the cases or instances taken from a random sample of the group's population?

Question 32

Reasoning from makes a figurative comparison between case that are essentially dissimilar.

A)analogy
B)parallel case
C)dilemma
D)definition

Question 33

"North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's claim about what his country will do with nuclear weapons can best be understood in terms of the character Darth Vader in the Star Wars trilogy. North Korea is the Death Star of the Pacific Rim." This statement reflects the reasoning pattern termed

A)parallel case.
B)analogy.
C)generalization.
D)authority.

Question 34

In testing the validity of the argument in question 13, you would well advised to ask

A)are the dissimilarities between the leader of a country and a fictional movie character so great as to adversely influence perception of the implied similarities in the analogy?
B)are sufficient cases of instances cited as grounds to ensure the reliability of the generalization?
C)is the relationship described consistent with the views of a majority or minority of experts in the field?
D)All of the above

Question 35

"The war against the Taliban is like the popular card game of Texas Hold 'Em in which the terrorists consistently out bluff the Obama Administration." This statement reflects the reasoning pattern known as

A)parallel case.
B)generalization.
C)analogy.
D)authority.

Question 36

In testing the validity of the argument in question 15, you would be well advised to ask

A)are the war against terrorism and a card game sufficiently similar in all important ways for the analogy to hold up?
B)are sufficient cases of instances cited as grounds to ensure the reliability of the generalization?
C)is the relationship described consistent with the views of a majority or minority of experts in the field?
D)All of the above

Question 37

An argument from relies on the credibility and expertise of the source to warrant acceptance of a claim.

A)parallel case.
B)generalization.
C)analogy.
D)authority.

Question 38

Which of the following is a test of argument from authority?

A)Is the source a qualified expert in the field by reason of training, experience, or background?
B)Is the statement made within the context of the authority's area of expertise?
C)Is the authority unbiased?
D)All of the above

Question 39

The pattern of reasoning based on creating an either-or choice is

A)analogy.
B)parallel case.
C)dilemma.
D)cause.

Question 40

"If I stay in school, I'll be tens of thousands of dollars in debt by the time I graduate. If I drop out of school, I won't be able to land a high-paying job." This is an example of an argument from

A)sign.
B)cause.
C)dilemma.
D)generalization.