Examtests with Critical Thinking van Moore and Parker - 13th edition

Why is critical thinking important? - ExamTests 1

Questions

Question 1

When do we think critically?

Question 2

What are the three core elements of critical thinking?

Question 3

What is meant by "cognitive bias"?

Question 4

What are heuristics?

Question 5

When do we say a claim is "true"?

Answer indication

Question 1

We engage in critical thinking when we use our reasoning to arrive at conclusions.

Question 2

The three core elements of critical thinking are :

1. Statements.
2. Issues.
3. Arguments.

Question 3

"Cognitive bias" is a belief that is influenced by unconscious features of human psychology.

Question 4

Heuristics are general rules that we unconsciously use when estimating probabilities.

Question 5

A claim is "true" when it is free from error.

What two ways of reasoning are there? - ExamTests 2

Questions

Question 1

What is a deductive argument? What exactly is the relationship between the conclusion and premises? When can the conclusion be incorrect?

Question 2

What is the difference between a deductive and an inductive argument?

Question 3

Consider the following reasoning: "Until now, induction has always worked well, so it is a method that will always work well."

What kind of reasoning is this? Is it convincing reasoning?

Question 4

What's the problem with induction? What could it mean for the justification of scientific knowledge?

Question 5

From which two parts is an argument built by default?

Question 6

What is the difference between a deductive argument and an inductive argument?

Question 7

When is an argument valid?

Question 8

What three levels of belief exist?

Question 9

What is the difference between a deductive and an inductive argument?

Question 10

What does logic say is a good way to identify an argument? And why is this necessary?

Question 11

What is an unspoken premise and what is an unspoken conclusion. Give an example.

Question 12

How can you make an argument stronger?

Question 13

When is an argument valid?

Question 14

Is this a deductive or an inductive argument: "I don't like to walk, so I won't enjoy the walking vacation." And why?

Answer indication

Question 1

A deductive argument consists of premises. Premises are true statements, assumptions, and a conclusion that follows logically. If the premises are correct, so is the conclusion, if you agree with the premises, you agree with the conclusion.

For example: From P1 = horses are bigger than humans and P2 = humans are bigger than ants, it follows that C = horses are bigger than ants.

The conclusion of a deductive argument can be incorrect in two cases. If one or more of the premises is incorrect (ants are bigger than horses) and if the argument is invalid, i.e. it is constructed in the wrong way (from P1 = horses are bigger than humans and P2 = ants are smaller than horses, you cannot conclude that humans are bigger than ants (nor that ants are bigger than humans!)).

Question 2

The conclusion from a deductive argument is always true if the premises and argument structure are correct. This provides certainty. However, this is a limited form of certainty; because of what are we quite sure? Where do we get the certain premises from? And how do we ever arrive at new knowledge through deductive reasoning? That the conclusion is certain is because it was already contained in the premises. Strictly speaking, deduction does not generate new knowledge.

New knowledge is possible with inductive reasoning. Inductive arguments are 'non-conclusive', or 'non-demonstrative', which means that the conclusion does not follow logically from the premises but is only supported by them. A conclusion from an inductive argument is therefore never certain. This is a disadvantage, but at the same time makes new knowledge possible. From the fact that all the ravens you have seen so far were black, you can conclude that ravens are probably black.

Question 3

This is inductive reasoning because a conclusion (it will always work) is drawn from a number of observations (so far it has worked every time). This is not very convincing, as induction only has to work once and the whole conclusion can be dismissed.

Question 4

In induction it is assumed on the basis of a number of observations of a phenomenon that the phenomenon will always occur in this way. In addition, induction provides a "most likely explanation", based on given facts.

Take the following for example; "Your partner went to the supermarket this morning and bought lasagna sheets. In addition, she got yeasts from your grandmother fresh tomatoes and you can smell the melted cheese all over the house. The inductive reasoning is that you are eating lasagna tonight. When you sit down at the table, it turns out that you are eating soup tonight. Your partner has been making lasagna for tomorrow because there is little time to cook tomorrow. So your induction was wrong.

This same problem arises in science. Because most of what we know is made up of induction, there is a high probability that incorrect assumptions have been made. This is also regularly proven.

Question 5

An argument is always made up of:

1. One or more premise(s).
2. A conclusion.

Question 6

The difference between a deductive argument and an inductive argument is that a deductive argument is used to prove a claim while an inductive argument is used to support a claim.

Question 7

An argument is valid when it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false at the same time.

Question 8

The three levels of belief are:

1. Ethos.
2. Logos.
3. Pathos.

Question 9

A deductive argument is one where the premise is true, the conclusion is also true. The argument here is evidence. An argument is inductive if the premise is true and conclusion is likely to be true. The argument is now supportive.

Question 10

The rule of good argument identification is that you need at least two statements or claims and the word "therefore" (or a similar word / phrase). So, "I was walking on the street (premise) and it was raining (premise), so I got wet (conclusion)". In short, an argument consists of two parts: the premise (s) and the conclusion. Good argument identification is necessary to avoid ambiguity.

Question 11

Unstated premises are premises that count as a reason, but are not spoken. For example: "You may only drive with a driver's license (premise). Bob is not allowed to drive (conclusion). "So the unstated premise is:" Bob doesn't have a driver's license. "An unstated conclusion is a conclusion that counts as a conclusion, but is not spoken. For example: "X's top drivers are women (premise). Marianne is director of X (premise). "The unspoken conclusion is therefore:" Marianne is one of the best directors. "

Question 12

An argument becomes stronger by coming up with premises that are very likely to be true.

Question 13

The conclusion of a deductive argument is true if the premises are also true. Such an argument is therefore valid.

Question 14

It's an inductive argument because the conclusion is probably true.

How do you write a good text? - ExamTests 3

Questions

Question 1

When is a term called "vague"?

Question 2a

When is there "ambiguity"?

Question 2b

What three types of ambiguities are distinguished?

Question 3a

Name three purposes of definitions.

Question 3b

What kinds of definitions are there?

Question 4

What components does an essay consist of?

Question 5

Name two things that can make a statement unclear. Explain them.

Question 6

Name, explain and give an example of three types of definitions.

Answer indication

Question 1

A term is called vague when it is not clear what the limits of the concept are.

Question 2a

Ambiguity occurs when a word or phrase has more than one meaning and can therefore be understood in different ways.

Question 2b

Three types of ambiguity are:

1. Semantic.
2. Group related.
3. Syntatic ambiguity.

Question 3a

Examples of correct answers are three of the following four:

1. Definitions allow us to know what words mean.
2. Definitions allow us to give a special meaning to a word in some contexts.
3. We use definitions to avoid vagueness, ambiguity and generalization.
4. Definitions can be used to convince people.

Question 3b

There are three types of definitions:

1. Definitions using examples.
2. Definitions using synonyms.
3. Analytic definitions.

Question 4

An essay consists of four components:

1. A clarification of the topic.
2. An explanation of someone's own opinion on that topic.
3. Arguments that support their own opinion.
4. Debunking people's arguments who have a different opinion on the subject.

Question 5

An argument can be unclear because of:

• Blurredness: A statement can be vague if it is incomplete, imprecise, or if details are missing. The meaning of the statement may also be unclear.
• Ambiguity: A claim can be ambiguous if it can be interpreted in multiple ways

Question 6

Three types of definitions:

Definition by a synonym: A term or phrase is replaced by another phrase with the same meaning. For example, the word ambiguity is replaced by the word ambiguity.

An analytic definition is one that specifies. Characteristics are sought that belong to the term. For example: a cat has four legs. Characteristics are also sought that do not belong to the term. For example: a cow does not eat meat. In addition, you can see what something is used for. You can boil water with a kettle.

For a definition by an example, examples are sought for a term. At home, you can think of a farm, a flat, a terraced house or a villa. You can give a description of a concept that is difficult to define.

When is something credible? - ExamTests 4

Questions

Question 1

In what three cases do claims fail in credibility?

Question 2

Which factor determines whether the source has enough knowledge about the subject?

Question 3

What is one of the reasons that the quality of the news has declined?

Question 4

What three things are important to know about media credibility?

Question 5

What three categories of commercials exist that do not use reasons to make us buy a particular product?

Question 6

What does the credibility of a claim depend on?

Question 7

Why should you be careful when judging a claim based on your own observation?

Answer indication

Question 1

Claims fall short of credibility when they:

1. Contradict our observations.
2. Do not match our experiences or our background knowledge.
3. Come from untrustworthy sources.

Question 2

Whether a source has enough knowledge about a topic depends on a person's expertise and experience.

Question 3

One reason the quality of the news has declined is that television channels in America are now owned by a small number of cooperatives.

Question 4

It is important to keep three things in mind regarding the credibility of the media:

1. People in the media, like us, also make mistakes.
2. The media can experience pressure from the government and are sensitive to manipulation.
3. Mmost media want to make a profit.

Question 5

Commercials that do not give reasons to get us to buy a product consist of three categories:

1. Commercials that trigger feelings in us.
2. Commercials that show people we admire are using the product.
3. Commercials that show a product in a situation that we would like to find ourselves in.

Question 6

The credibility of a claim depends on the claim itself and its source. Check whether a statement is true, for example by calling in an expert. A statement is more reliable if it comes from a disinterested party than from an interested party.

Question 7

Many things can cloud your own perception, so you should be careful when judging a claim. Think of: fatigue, foggy weather, being color blind, wishful thinking (seeing something as you want to see it) and (unconscious) prejudices.

How does persuasion work? - ExamTests 5

Questions

Question 1

What is Rhetoric?

Question 2

Into which groups can rhetorical methods be divided?

Question 3

What is the difference between a euphemism and a dysphemism?

Question 4a

What are demagogues?

Question 4b

Name four techniques that use demagogues.

Question 5

What is Rhetoric?

Question 6

Give and explain four examples of rhetorical means.

Question 7

Under which category of rhetorical means do the following statements fall:

1. You lost your mind once more.
2. Surinamese are lazy people.
3. I'm not saying you did it, but those papers aren't properly arranged.
4. Recommended by dermatologists.
5. Don't take him seriously, he's just a kid.
6. Did you get an eight for the exam? Well, then I am Einstein. (haha)
7. I've said that many times now.
8. What a horribly ridiculous sweater you are wearing.
9. With that haircut you look like a cauliflower.

Question 8

Why should you be careful when viewing photo or film material?

Answer indication

Question 1

Rhetoric is about the investigation of persuasive writing.

Question 2

Rhetorical methods can be divided into four groups. The first group usually consists of single words or short phrases that are positive or negative; called slanters. The second group of methods depend on unjustified assumptions. The third group consists of methods related to humor. Group 4 consists of methods using definitions, explanations and analogies.

Question 3

A euphemism is used to express something as positive or neutral instead of negative. A dysphemism is the opposite of a euphemism and is thus used to evoke a negative feeling in someone.

Question 4a

Demagogues' use an extreme form of rhetoric to spread false ideas and gain power over people.

Question 4b

Four techniques that demagogues use are otherizing, demonizing, amplifying xenophobia and fear and hate mongering.

Question 5

Rhetoric is a speaking skill that is not about convincing by means of logical argumentation, but by influencing emotions and feelings. When using rhetorical means it seems as if there are arguments, but it is not so. These tools are used to give something a positive or negative twist.

Question 6

Four examples of rhetorical means are:

• Euphemism: a soothing description. You can also call a rebel a dissent.
• Dysphemism: An Enlarging Expression. You can also call a rebel a terrorist.
• Rhetorical definition: a description of a term that affects the reader's or listener's emotions. For example: Prime Minister Balkenende is nothing more than a terrorist.
• Stereotype: having a persistent image of a group's characteristics that is not based on anything. For example: People from Leiden are bastards.

Question 7

Category of rhetorical means:

1. Rhetorical statement.
2. Stereotype.
3. Innuendo.
4. Weasel.
5. Downplaying.
6. Ridiculation.
7. Hyperbola.
8. Dysphemism.
9. Analogy.

Question 8

Photographic and film material can have enormous rhetorical power. Images can (strongly) influence emotions and thus also the critical thinking ability. Images can be the basis or support for an assertion, but images can be interpreted in different ways. In some cases it is good to first disconnect the emotions and then examine the facts.

How does relevance work? - ExamTests 6

Questions

Question 1a

What is a fallacy?

Question 1b

What is a relevance fallacy?

Question 1c

What is another name for a relevance fallacy?

Question 2

What is the most common relevance fallacy?

Question 3

What is a strawman?

Question 4

When are you doing "apple polishing"?

Question 5

What is an ad hominem fallacy?

Question 6

What is a False Dilemma?

Question 7

Give an example of a "straw man" fallacy.

Question 8

What is the difference between a "genetic fallacy" and an ad hominem circumstance fallacy?

Answer indication

Question 1a

A fallacy is a reasoning error; an argument that does not support its content.

Question 1b

In the case of a relevant fallacy, the premise is not relevant to the issue in the question.

Question 1c

Another name for a relevant fallacy is a "red herring".

Question 2

The "argumentum ad hominem" is the most common relevance fallacy.

Question 3

The "strawman" is a fallacy in which someone misinterprets or exaggerates the view of the opposing party.

Question 4

You're doing apple polishing when you're trying to change someone's attitude with flattery.

Question 5

The ad hominem fallacy is a confusion between the qualities of an assertion and the qualities of the person making the assertion. With this fallacy, not the claim, but the person is judged.

Question 6

In the false dilemma, there is only one choice of two options, while several alternatives exist. An example: "Your money or your life." Or, "If you are not for us, you are against us."

Question 7

For example, "I'd like to skip this step." Response: "Well, then you might as well stop completely." Or, "It's time you tidy up your room." Response: "Again. Do I sometimes have to tidy up my room every day? "

Question 8

To reject a claim because it comes from a certain group is a genetic fallacy. Rejecting a claim because a person is a member of a particular group is an ad hominem circumstance fallacy.

What are inductive thinking errors? - ExamTests 7

Questions

Question 1

What is the similarity and difference between generalizations and analogies?

Question 2

What are Inductive Fallacies?

Question 3

Which two fallacies are common in inductive generalizations?

Question 4

What is the fallacy of "weak analogy"?

Question 5

Name two well-known fallacies in which an erroneous cause-and-effect relationship is drawn.

Question 6

What is a post hoc fallacy?

Answer indication

Question 1

With both forms we can draw a conclusion about a certain group.

However, in an analogy this is done by comparing the group with another group. For example, if group A and group B look alike at this stage, then group A and group B will also look alike at the next stage

In generalization you draw a conclusion about a group by looking at a sample. If a sample from that group shows these traits to a large extent, the group will most likely also show these traits.

Question 2

Inductive fallacies are intended to support the likelihood of their conclusions, but are in reality too weak to do so.

Question 3

Two thinking errors that often occur with inductive generalizations are:

1. Generalizing too quickly ("hasty generalizing").
2. Incorrectly generalizing ("biased generalizing").

Question 4

The fallacy of "weak analogy" (also called false analogy) is a weak argument based on insignificant similarities between two or more things.

Question 5

Two well-known fallacies are "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" and "cum hoc, ergo propter hoc".

Question 6

The post hoc fallacy is always thinking that X follows Y. That X follows Y does not necessarily mean that Y is the cause of X.

What formal errors of thought are there? - ExamTests 8

Questions

Question 1

Name three formal fallacies.

Question 2

What do the "equivocation" and "ambipholy" fallacies have in common?

Question 3

What is the difference between the "composition" and "negation" fallacies?

Question 4

What is the "gambler fallacy"?

Answer indication

Question 1

Three formal fallacies are:

1. "Affirmation of the consequent''.
2. "Denial of the antecedent" .
3. "The undivided middle''.

Question 2

These two fallacies make a mistake about semantic ambiguity.

Question 3

The composition fallacy occurs when a feature of parts of something is incorrectly assigned to the whole. The opposite of this is the fallacy distribution: assuming that something that is true for the whole is also true for parts of the whole.

Question 4

Here someone is convinced that the previous performance of independent events will have an effect on a subsequent independent event.

Which deductive arguments are there? - ExamTests 9

Questions

Question 1

What are categorical claims? Which four main types can you distinguish? Give an example of each.

Question 2

What is a syllogism?

Question 3

What are the most important concepts that occur here? Why are they important to science?

Question 4

Which four types of claims exist?

Question 5

Which model can be used to describe these claims?

Question 6

What does the "square of opposition" mean?

Question 7

Name three categorical techniques that can be used to transform a claim.

Question 8

What are categorical syllogisms?

Anwer indication

Question 1

Categorical statements are statements that say something about the group (category) of certain things. Categorical statements are statements about a specific category. The four main types are General Laws Affirmative (A), General Laws Denial (E), Observations Affirmative (I) and Observations Denial (O). Examples:

• A: All metals are conductors.

• E: No plastics are conductors.

• I: Some metals are conductors.

• O: Some metals are not conductors.

Question 2

A syllogism is a deductive argument that is derived from two premises. The most important terms are:

• Major term: the term that serves as the predication term for the conclusion of syllogism, this is indicated by the letter P.

• Minor term: the term that serves as the subject term of the conclusion of the syllogism is indicated by the letter S.

• The middle term: the term that occurs in both premises but not in the conclusion is indicated by the letter M.

Question 3

Syllogisms are important for science because with syllogisms you can draw a conclusion that is true from two arguments that are true. So you can check whether an argument is valid. An example:

• All Dutch people are consumers

• Some consumers are not VVD people

• Some Dutch people are not VVD people (conclusion)

• No VVD members = P

• Dutch = S

• Consumers = M

Question 4

There are four types of claims: A- ('all ... are ...') ,, I- ('some ... are ...'), E- ('no ... are ...'), and O- ('some ... are not ... claims).

Question 5

These claims can be described by means of Venn diagrams.

Question 6

The square of opposition shows the relationships between different types of claims.

Question 7

Three categorical techniques can be used to transform claims are: conversion, obversion and contraposition.

Question 8

Categorical syllogisms are standardized deductive arguments.

What other deductive arguments are there? - ExamTests 10

Questions

Question 1

The two deduction rules associated with the conditional proposition “If… then…” are the Modus Ponens (MP) and Modus Tollens (MT). Give the truth table for “If… then…”. Show the reasoning schemes for MP and MT. Use the truth table for “If… then…” to show why MP and MT are valid reasoning schemes. Also give 2 examples of invalid reasoning.

Question 2

What four types of truth tables are there?

Question 3

What does a "truth-functional analysis" entail?

Question 4

By what tool can we investigate whether an argument is valid?

Question 5

What does deduction entail?

Answer indication

Question 1

Truth tables help you investigate whether a formula is valid or feasible. They can also be used to find out whether an inference is valid and whether two formulas are logically equivalent. In truth tables, the truth or falsehood of a proposition can be indicated in different ways. One can simply write "true" or "false", but usually one writes a T (for true, true) and F (for false, false). The 1 is also used for true and 0 for false.

The truth table for "if ... then" is as follows:

Note: "If A, then B" is always 1, except when A = 1 and B = 0.

A is the antecedens and B the consequence. So "if A then B" is false only when the antecedens are true and the consequently false. If both A and B are false, the statement is still correct. For example: If John drives faster than 50 (A), John will be fined (B). If A and B are both false, so John does not drive faster than 50 and John is not fined, the statement is still valid.

Punching mode
Suppose: "if P then Q" = 1 and P = 1 then Q must always be 1. This is called the modus ponens, also known as the propositional tune or truncation rule.

Spinning lens mode
Suppose: "if P then Q" = 1 and Q = 0, then P must also be 0. This is also called the canceling mood. The toll lens mode is used in falsification.

Examples of reasoning:

Valid: Ponens mode

[1] If A, then B [1]
If your rabbit eats deadly nightshade, it will get sick.
[2] A [2] Your rabbit eats deadly nightshade.
[3] So: B [3] So: he gets sick.

Valid: Tollens mode

[1] If A, then B [1]
If your rabbit eats deadly nightshade, it will get sick
[2] Not B [2] Your rabbit is not sick
[3] So: Not A [3] So he didn't eat deadly nightshade.
Invalid: Confirmation consequently

[1] If A, then B [1]
If your rabbit eats deadly nightshade, it will get sick.
[2] B [2] Your rabbit is sick.
[3] So: A [3] So: he ate deadly nightshade.
Invalid: Denial of the antecedent

[1] If A, then B [1]
If your rabbit eats deadly nightshade, it will get sick.
[2] Not A [2] Your rabbit does not eat wolf cherry
[3] So: Not B [3] So: he doesn't get sick.
With the two invalid variants, A (the 'if' part) is seen as a necessary condition, while it is a sufficient condition here. For example, look at the invalid confirmation of the consequences: there could be all kinds of other reasons why your rabbit is sick, it doesn't necessarily have to have eaten deadly nightshade.

Question 2

Conjunction, negation, conditional and disjunction.

Question 3

Such an analysis displays the truth values ​​of a general claim, based on the truth values ​​of smaller parts of the claim.

Question 4

We can determine whether an argument is valid from a truth table.

Question 5

Deduction is a useful means of proving that an argument is valid instead of that an argument is not valid.

What is Inductive Reasoning? - ExamTests 11

Questions

Question 1

What is an argument based on analogy?

Question 2

What parts does such an argument consist of?

Question 3

When is there generalization?

Question 4

Which three principles apply to a causal statement?

Question 5

What methods are there that can be implemented to confirm a causal statement?

Question 6

What is an analogical argument?

Question 7

What should you be aware of in non-experimental effect-causal research?

Answer indication

Question 1

An argument based on analogy is an argument that something has a certain property, because an equal thing has the same property.

Question 2

Such an argument consists of two analogues: a premise analog and a conclusion analog.

Question 3

You generalize from a sample when you attribute a certain trait to members of a certain population, because this has been proven in a small group.

Question 4

Three principles apply here: the "paired unusual events principle", the "common variable principle" and the covariate principle.

Question 5

These methods are:

1. A randomized experiment.
2. Prospective observational study.
3. Retrospective observational study.

Question 6

An analogical argument is a conclusion drawn from one thing or an event and comparing that conclusion to another thing.

Question 7

In non-experimental effect-causal research, be careful not to attribute an effect to a cause that does not matter.

What is the moral, legal, and ethical reasoning? - ExamTests 12

Questions

Question 1

What is the difference between a value judgment and moral reasoning?

Question 2

Name two principles of moral reasoning.

Question 3a

What is consequentialism?

Question 3b

Name three examples of consequentialism.

Question 4

What does the duty theory entail?

Question 5

Which form of ethics does not focus on what should be done, but on how someone should be.

Answer indication

Question 1

A value judgment is a statement that expresses values, while moral reasoning is about judgments based on moral values ​​(for example, in terms of good or bad).

Question 2

Two principles of moral reasoning are the consistency principle and moral principles.

Question 3a

Consequentialism is based on the premise that the consequences of a decision or action determine the moral value.

Question 3b

Three exam ples are utilitarianism, selfishness and altruism.

Question 4

In duty theory, value is attached to moral duties. We should or should not do things not to achieve something, but simply because it is right or wrong.

Question 5

Virtue ethics.