Deck 5: Logic

Question 1

____ is the reasoning process used to justify claims and reach conclusions.

A) Introspection
B) Reflection
C) Logic
D) Creativity

Answer 1

C

Question 2

Which of the following is not a guideline for developing and facilitating logical criminal justice communications?

A) Advance defensible claims.
B) Avoid logical fallacies.
C) Abandon logic when it is clear that the topic is emotional.
D) Be a habitual critical thinker.
E) Be informed.

Answer 2

C

Question 3

____ involves conscious reflection, wherein we base beliefs on a fair and logical assessment of available information.

A) analytics
B) argumentation
C) deliberation
D) critical thinking

Answer 3

D

Question 4

Which of the following is not part of being a habitual critical thinker?

A) faith
B) open-mindedness and objectivity
C) self-awareness
D) skepticism

Question 5

Criminal justice professionals should be objective, rational, and professional enough to maintain their way of thinking and acting when they encounter logic and evidence. They should not change their minds just because they learn something new.

Question 6

____ refers to having the substantive knowledge and the technical skills necessary to do well that which needs to be done.

A) intelligence
B) competence
C) integrity
D) experience

Question 7

A(n) ____ is the fusion of claims, evidence, and inferences.

A) quarrel
B) argument
C) paper
D) theory

Question 8

A(n) ____ is an arguable assertion.

A) argument
B) claim
C) inference
D) evidence

Question 9

A(n) ____ is a claim upon which another claim is based.

A) premise
B) conclusion
C) assumption
D) declaration

Question 10

A(n) ____ is a claim that follows from premises and/or evidence.

A) premise
B) conclusion
C) assumption
D) declaration

Question 11

____ serves as proof of something-as justification for claims.

A) claim
B) reason
C) argument
D) evidence

Question 12

____ is the logical connection between the different pieces of the argument.

A) declaration
B) claim
C) inference
D) evidence

Question 13

Where ____ logic involves reasoning from general principles to a more specific conclusion, ____ logic involves reasoning from specific observations to a more general conclusion.

A) deductive, inductive
B) inductive, deductive
C) micro, macro
D) macro, micro

Question 14

Deductive reasoning is valid when the premises are true and the conclusion is guaranteed by the premise(s).

Question 15

Which of the following is not a question we can ask to determine if deductive reasoning is valid?

A) Are there zero exceptions to the conclusion?
B) Are we sufficiently convinced of the conclusion?
C) Is the conclusion fully accountable by the premises?
D) Is the conclusion compatible with the premises?

Question 16

An unsound deductive argument is not strong, but it is not entirely worthless either.

Question 17

When we reach conclusions based on evidence, we are using inductive logic.

Question 18

We can be 100% certain of the conclusion in a deductive argument, but we cannot be 100% certain of the conclusion in an inductive argument.

Question 19

Inductive reasoning is strong when the evidence renders the conclusion certain.

Question 20

All but which of the following questions are tests we can use to assess the strength of inductive reasoning?

A) Are we sufficiently convinced of the conclusion, given the evidence?
B) Is this conclusion more plausible than alternative conclusions based on the same evidence?
C) Are there zero exceptions to the conclusions?
D) Is the conclusion compatible with the evidence?

Question 21

Some arguments have other arguments within them. Such arguments within arguments are called interior arguments, while the argument containing the interior arguments is called the ultimate argument.

Question 22

An argument may contain any number of resolutions.

Question 23

A(n) ____ is an error in reasoning.

A) lapse in judgment
B) logical fallacy
C) blunder
D) fallacious inquiry

Question 24

A(n) ____ is a type of logical fallacy wherein two logically incompatible beliefs are regarded as true.

A) double standard
B) logical paradox
C) red herring
D) straw man

Question 25

Which of the following is not a category of logical fallacies presented in Chapter 5?

A) fallacies of inconsistency
B) fallacies of irrelevance
C) fallacies of vacuity
D) fallacies of clarity

Question 26

Arguing that something must be true (e.g., prisons reduce crime) because we've known or been doing it for a long time reflects which logical fallacy?

A) appeal to tradition
B) argument from personal incredulity
C) circular reasoning
D) false cause

Question 27

Treating an issue as though there are only two possibilities when there really are more than two possibilities reflects which logical fallacy?

A) faulty analogy
B) appeal to force
C) red herring
D) false dilemma

Question 28

Attacking the advocate of an argument rather than the substance of the argument reflects which logical fallacy?

A) hasty generalization
B) straw man
C) personal attack
D) argument from personal incredulity

Question 29

Arguing that, because one position taken in an argument is untenable, an opposing position must be true.

A) bandwagon approach
B) appeal to force
C) argument from the negative
D) appeal to a lack of evidence

Question 30

Arguing that, because it makes no sense to you, the argument cannot be true.

A) appeal to a lack of evidence
B) argument from personal incredulity
C) irrelevant conclusion
D) stacking the deck

Question 31

"Tom and Rick got in a fight at the pool earlier in the day, so it had to have been Rick who killed Tom last night." Which logical fallacy best describes this faulty reasoning?

A) appeal to force
B) false cause: post hoc ergo propter hoc
C) begging the question
D) appeal to a lack of evidence

Question 32

"The jury found him not guilty. But they're just a bunch of idiots. You know they screwed up when that man is so obviously guilty." Which logical fallacy best describes this faulty reasoning?

A) personal attack
B) appeal to tradition
C) bandwagon approach
D) hasty generalization

Question 33

"I just don't see how the abolition of monetary bail would work. It's obviously going to fail." Which logical fallacy best describes this faulty reasoning?

A) hypothesis contrary to fact
B) stacking the deck
C) argument from personal incredulity
D) appeal to improper authority

Question 34

"You're asking me if I've heard anything about who might be breaking into all those cars in the neighborhood? I hear a lot, and one thing I can tell you is that people are mad as hell about that new stop sign." Which logical fallacy best describes this faulty reasoning?

A) false dilemma
B) faulty analogy
C) red herring
D) appeal to a lack of evidence

Question 35

Which of the following lines of reasoning reflects the logical fallacy of appeal to improper authority?

A) I know there is less crime in gated communities, because my criminology professor talked about this in class.
B) I know there is less crime in gated communities, because I read about the crime rate in my criminal justice textbook.
C) I know there is less crime in gated communities, because a TV commercial said so.
D) I know there is less crime in gated communities, because I read an article that reached that conclusion based on an analysis of UCR and NCVS data.

Question 36

Which of the following lines of reasoning reflects the logical fallacy of faulty analogy?

A) Neighborhoods with more graffiti also have more thefts and assaults than neighborhoods with less graffiti.
B) Graffiti is like a red sky in the morning: It is a sign of bad things to come.
C) Police officers have a lot in common with guardian angels; for example, they both protect us from bad things.
D) This city is like no other city I've ever seen. It is impossible to find your destination.

Question 37

Which of the following should we do when we diagram an argument? Select all that apply.

A) Modify the conclusion.
B) Identify the premise(s).
C) Identify the evidence.
D) Determine how the premise(s) lead(s) to the conclusion.

Question 38

When diagramming an argument, each piece of evidence should have its own inference arrow leading to a claim for which it is offered as proof.

Question 39

When diagramming arguments, the text recommends color coding to distinguish between different lines of reasoning leading to the conclusion.

Question 40

After we create our argument diagram, we should correct it by…. Select all that apply.

A) Adding anything relevant but absent.
B) Cross through anything irrelevant but present.
C) Cross through any irrelevant but absent.
D) Add anything relevant but present.

Question 41

A(n) ____ is a belief taken to be true that can influence an argument but for which no evidence may be offered.

A) assumption
B) premise
C) resolution
D) claim

Question 42

Which of the following is a rule of argumentation?

A) Evidence and premises can be challenged, but conclusions and inferences cannot be challenged.
B) We should never concede a point.
C) Once challenged, inferences, premises, and evidence require concession or justification.
D) We must accept premises as true.

Question 43

Which of the following is not true regarding how we state our conclusions?

A) We should not phrase certain conclusions as though they are uncertain.
B) We should not phrase uncertain conclusions as though they are certain.
C) We should word a probable conclusion in a way that implies a stronger basis than we have.
D) We should word a definite conclusion in a way that allows us to avoid committing.

Question 44

Where policies set expectations and standards for behavior, practices are ways of implementing a policy.

Question 45

A(n) ____ is an applied research product that examines the effectiveness of some policy in achieving its stated goal(s), while a(n) ____ is an applied research product that assesses some phenomenon and proposes a plan for addressing it.

A) evaluation, recommendation
B) recommendation, evaluation
C) policy analysis, policy proposal
D) policy proposal, policy analysis

Question 46

In a policy analysis, the premises are a series of reasons supporting the conclusion of effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of the policy being analyzed.

Question 47

Which of the following is not one of the "5WH" questions to use in policy papers?

A) When?
B) Who?
C) Where?
D) Why not?

Question 48

Which of the following accurately reflects the main sections and their order in a policy analysis?

A) introduction, policy context, policy description, policy evaluation, discussion
B) introduction, theory, research, methods, evaluation, discussion
C) introduction, policy description, policy evaluation, policy proposal, discussion
D) introduction, research, theory, methods, evaluation, discussion

Question 49

With a policy proposal, the conclusion is the claim that the policy being analyzed has been effective (or not) in achieving its intended outcomes.

Question 50

Which of the following is not in Chapter 5's list of items that can be used to compare and contrast crime-control policies?

A) effect size
B) cost
C) affected population
D) stakeholder satisfaction

Question 51

Which of the following accurately reflects the main sections and their order in a policy proposal?

A) introduction, crime problem, crime policy, discussion
B) introduction, crime policy, crime problem, discussion
C) introduction, description of the crime problem, explanation of the crime problem, comparison of policy options, policy recommendation, discussion
D) introduction, policy recommendation, comparison of policy options, explanation of the crime problem, description of the crime problem, discussion

Question 52

Which of the following is not a best practice for developing compelling policy analyses and proposals?

A) Articulate the nexus between crime problem and crime policy.
B) Expect complete crime eradication.
C) Identify objective criteria to guide the analysis.
D) Consider unintended consequences.

Question 53

A(n) ____ is a written report of an investigation into a defendant's life, which is written by a probation officer to assist a judge.

A) presentence investigation report
B) arrest report
C) perp bio
D) preliminary biographical report

Question 54

The conclusion in a presentence investigation report is the probation officer's assessment of guilty or not-guilty.

Question 55

A weak presentence investigation report recommends a sentence that is not logically connected to the evidence and/or the probation officer's assessment of that evidence.

Question 56

Which of the following is not one of the areas in which the probation officer should use evidence to make an assessment?

A) the offense
B) the victim
C) the community
D) the defendant

Question 57

Which of the following are questions to answer in the offense portion of a presentence investigation report? Select all that apply.

A) Is it situational in nature or indicative of persistent problems?
B) Was the offense against person or property?
C) Does the defendant acknowledge responsibility for the offense?
D) What was the motive for the offense?

Question 58

All but which are questions to answer in the community portion of a presentence investigation report?

A) Does the defendant pose a direct threat to the safety and welfare of others?
B) What community resources are available?
C) Would a disposition other than incarceration tend to depreciate the seriousness of the crime?
D) Is the defendant employable?

Question 59

Which of the following is not a best practice for developing compelling presentence investigation reports?

A) Clearly distinguish between information that is factual, inferred, and alleged.
B) Distinguish between verified and unverified information.
C) Address discrepancies in information.
D) Objectively list the evidence; do not interpret it.