Question

1. An SRJC student: "I saw a woman in the gym wearing an SRJC soccer jersey. Thus I can assume she's on the SRJC soccer team".

a) questionable analogy

b) hasty conclusion

c) equivocation

d) fallacious appeal to authority

2. Welfare programs for the poor have destroyed the lives of millions of children. This is a system of child abuse. People on welfare are like thieves who pick your pockets.

a) questionable analogy

b) small sample

c) invincible ignorance

d) no fallacy

3. Given: All Republicans are against anything that Obama is for. I am a Republican. Thus, I am against anything that Obama is for.

This is an example of:

a) a weak inductive argument

b) a strong inductive argument

c) not an argument

d) a deductive argument

4. Given: Casey has always gotten an "A" in his math classes and next semester he is taking Math 444. He will probably get an "A" in this course.

This is an example of:

a) non-argument

b) a cogent fallacy

c) an inductive argument

d) a deductive argument

5. In a recent poll at UC Berkeley, they asked a sample of 1100 students what was the most pressing problem for them at UC Berkeley; large classes, parking, limited access to professors, and insufficient number of course sections.

Which is the best criticism of this poll?

a) The wording of the question is confusing

b) The poll is biased

c) The poll omits a relevant choice

d) The sample size is too small

Answer 1

Answer-1: b) hasty conclusion: assumption in above sentence is given on the basis of SRJC jersey only. No more information is collected to support the conclusion. Only a jersey can’t assure her as a team member.

Explanation for options, a), c) & d): it is not questionable analogy because there is analogy between jersey and team members because they carry jersey to represent their relationship with SRJC team. it is not equivocation because we make conclusion on the basis of assumptions and it is clearly written in the statement that “I can assume she's on the SRJC soccer team". it is not fallacious appeal to authority because it can be true also that she is member of SRJC team as members wear dresses to represent the team.

Answer-2: d) no fallacy: because many welfare programs are launched and funds are also provided but the condition of poor children is same. So there is no fallacy that people involved in the implementation of these programs are taking advantage of poor children for their benefits.

Explanation for options, a), b), c): it is not questionable analogy because it is evident everywhere that the condition of poor children is same as it was earlier. It is not small sample because we can’t generalize things on small samples and generally it is happening with all poor children as change is not visible enough. It is not invincible ignorance because we can overcome with this ignorance by keeping a close look on the welfare workers and revising guidlines.

Answer-3: d) a deductive argument: because here the conclusion is drawn on the basis of one general opinion about Obama. Here person is against Obama because his/her community is against for the same.

Explanation for options, a), b), c): it is not a weak inductive argument because only one conclusion is drawn on the basis of single logic. It is not strong inductive argument because reason behind conclusion is not so strong to justify. It is not an argument because statement can have other side as well so it is a matter of argument.

Answer-4: c) an inductive argument: because there are strong evidences that Casey is good in Maths and getting “A” in Maths. This strong reason for good Maths base and record can help us to reach the conclusion that he has good understanding of Maths and will do good.

Explanation for options, a), b) & d): it is not non –argument because there can be other reason (health, financial condition) than his Maths record and understanding for not getting “A” grade in maths. It is not a cogent fallacy because person with strong mathematical intelligence can do good in that field. It is not a deductive reasoning because reason is so strong behind this conclusion of getting “A” in Maths.

Answer-5: c) The poll omits a relevant choice: because more issues other than mentioned above can be taken under consideration (for example freedom to speak etc) for the survey.   

Explanation for options, a), b) & d): it is not The wording of the question is confusing because it is very much clear to understand what is being asked from whom. It is not The poll is biased because poll is on the population being benefitted or influenced after poll results. It is not The sample size is too small because survey can be conducted on this sample size though more subjects are always encouraged for surveys.