Deck 2: Moral Reasoning

Question 1

Talk about:
-Antecedent

Answer 1

the "if" clause of a conditional; the clause that specifies a sufficient condition of the conditional's consequent.

Question 2

Talk about:
-Argument

Answer 2

a chain of thought in which reasons are offered in support of a particular conclusion.

Question 3

Talk about:
-Biconditional

Answer 3

a claim that supplies a condition that is both necessary and sufficient for something; an "if and only if" sentence.

Question 4

Talk about:
-Conditional

Question 5

Talk about:
-Consequent

Question 6

Talk about:
-Hypothetical syllogism

Question 7

Talk about:
-Logical validity

Question 8

Talk about:
-Modus ponens

Question 9

Talk about:
-Modus tollens

Question 10

Talk about:
-Necessary condition

Question 11

Talk about:
-Premises

Question 12

Talk about:
-Sufficient condition

Question 13

Talk about:
-Soundness

Question 14

What argument type has the form: "if P, then Q; P; therefore, Q"?

A) Modus tollens
B) Affirming the consequent
C) Hypothetical syllogism
D) Modus ponens

Question 15

What argument type has the form: "if P, then Q; Q is false; therefore, P is false"?

A) Modus tollens
B) Denying the antecedent
C) Hypothetical syllogism
D) Modus ponens

Question 16

What argument type has the form: "if P, then Q; if Q, then R; therefore, if P, then R"?

A) Modus tollens
B) Affirming the consequent
C) Hypothetical syllogism
D) Modus ponens

Question 17

What argument type has the form: "if P, then Q; Q; therefore, P is true"?

A) Modus tollens
B) Affirming the consequent
C) Hypothetical syllogism
D) Modus ponens

Question 18

What argument type has the form: "if P, then Q; P is false; therefore, Q is false"?

A) Modus tollens
B) Denying the antecedent
C) Hypothetical syllogism
D) Modus ponens

Question 19

A necessary condition is a _______ and a sufficient condition is a _______.

A) guarantee; requirement
B) guarantee; prerequisite
C) requirement; guarantee
D) precondition; requirement

Question 20

Trying to undermine the truth of a position by attacking the person who is advancing it is called

A) the ad hominem fallacy.
B) appeal to ignorance.
C) the straw man fallacy.
D) appeal to irrelevant emotions.

Question 21

Depicting a position in a way that makes it easy to refute is known as

A) the ad hominem fallacy.
B) appeal to ignorance.
C) the straw man fallacy.
D) appeal to irrelevant emotions.

Question 22

A claim that supplies a condition that is both necessary and sufficient for something is called a(n)

A) consequent.
B) guarantee.
C) biconditional.
D) antecedent.

Question 23

The sentence "An action is wrong if and only if it causes pain" is an example of a(n)

A) hypothetical syllogism.
B) appeal to irrelevant emotions.
C) straw man fallacy.
D) biconditional.

Question 24

Formal fallacies are always

A) sound.
B) invalid.
C) false.
D) unpersuasive.

Question 25

Someone who claims plants and trees are conscious simply because it hasn't been proven that they're not is guilty of making an appeal to

A) ignorance.
B) irrelevant emotions.
C) popularity.
D) authority.

Question 26

Which of the following is an example of a formal fallacy?

A) Ad hominen
B) Affirming the consequent
C) Straw man
D) Hasty generalization

Question 27

Which fallacy occurs when someone makes a sweeping claim about a group based on only a small handful of cases?

A) Ad hominen
B) Affirming the consequent
C) Straw man
D) Hasty generalization

Question 28

What is a valid argument? How can we determine whether an argument is valid or invalid? Provide an example of both a valid and invalid argument in your answer.

Question 29

What is an argument as philosophers use the term? What makes for a good argument?

Question 30

What is the difference between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition? Why is understanding necessary and sufficient conditions important for ethical thinking?

Question 31

Explain why every instance of modus ponens reasoning is logically valid, using the technical terms conditional, antecedent, and consequent in your answer. Why is the argument form affirming the consequent not similarly valid?

Question 32

What is a fallacy? Describe the fallacies discussed in the text, providing a concrete example of each.