True – False
- Some arguments, while not completely valid, are almost valid.
- If a deductive argument has true premises and a false conclusion, it is necessarily invalid.
- Any single argument can have only one conclusion.
- A statement may be legitimately spoken of as â€œvalidâ€ or â€œinvalid.â€
- An argument may be legitimately spoken of as â€œtrueâ€ or â€œfalse.â€
- For a disjunction to be true, both of its disjuncts must be true.
- An explanation will always have an inferential claim, which distinguishes the explanation from an argument.
- A geometrical proof is an example of an inductive argument.
- Being male is a sufficient condition for being a father.
- Sometimes a conditional claim can be re-expressed to form an argument.
- The necessary condition is always found in the antecedent of a conditional claim.
- A sound argument will always have a true conclusion.
- A cogent argument will have true premises and a probably true conclusion.
- It is impossible to have a valid argument with a false conclusion.
- An inductive argument could be sound, as long as the premises are true.
16. The induction “Soccer is like football. Each has a ball, each has a team, each has a goal line, and each is played on a field. Since most Americans are crazy about football, theyâ€™ll probably go nuts over soccer too” is a(n)
a) Argument based on analogy c) A Generalization
b) Argument based on signs d) A Cause-and-effect argument
17. Which of the following is a valid argument?
a) People usually enjoy a morning walk. Even though it is hot and smoggy this morning, you will enjoy a walk.
b) Every day the sun rises, so it will probably rise tomorrow.
c) If John loves Star Wars, then John loves Star Trek. John hates Star Trek, so John hates Star Wars.
d) Either it will rain or it will snow. It snowed; therefore, it did not rain.
18. Which of the following is a sound argument?
a) Every time I see the Exorcist I get scared to death. I saw the Exorcist last night; therefore I am dead.
b) If it is a pig, then it has wings. Itâ€™s a pig; therefore it has wings.
c) If the sun is out, then it is not raining. Itâ€™s not raining; therefore the sun must be out.
d) If it is a dog, then it is an animal. This is not an animal; therefore it is not a dog.
19. Which of these is a strong argument?
a) If pass this class, then you studied. John did not pass this class. Therefore, John did not study.
b) If you go to the store, Iâ€™ll give you money. I did not give you any money, so you must not have gone to the store.
c) All turtles ever found in Tasmania are green; so probably all Tasmanian turtles are green.
d) 10% of women in college never have children. So, if are in college, you will probably wonâ€™t get pregnant.
20. Which of the following commits a fallacy?
a) If it flies then itâ€™s a bird. It flies; therefore itâ€™s a bird.
b) If you drive a woody wagon, then youâ€™re a surfer. John is not a surfer; so he does not drive a woody wagon.
c) If you dance youâ€™ll love country music. I donâ€™t dance; therefore I do not love country music.
d) The Captain sinks with the ship or the Captain swims. The captain did not sink with the ship; so he swam.
Using the diagram provided, answer the following questions: (Use these answers for questions 21 â€“ 25)
a) Numbers 3 and 2 c) Numbers 6, 7, and 8 e) None of these
b) Numbers 2 and 4 d) Numbers 2, 4, and 5
21. Which series of numbers indicates a vertical argument pattern?
22. Which series of numbers indicates conjoint premises?
23. Which series of numbers indicates multiple conclusions?
24. Which series of numbers indicates a general Horizontal Pattern of independent evidence?
25. Which series of numbers indicates conjoint premises for intermediate conclusion # 5?
Given the following syllogism,
All drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints are drinkers. Hence, some drinkers are drunk drivers, since some drunk drivers are drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints.
- What would be the minor premise?
- Some drinkers are drunk drivers.
- All drunk drivers are drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints.
- All drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints are drinkers.
- Some drunk drivers are drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints.
- What is the middle term?
- Drivers afraid of sobriety checkpoints b. Drinkers c. Drunk drivers
- If put into correct form the mood is:
- OAI b. IAI c. OEI d. IEI e. OAO
- If put into correct form the figure is:
- 1 b. 2 c. 3 d. 4
- The syllogism commits
- Illicit major b. Undistributed middle c. Existential Fallacy, Boole
d. exclusive Premises e. No Fallacy
Given the following syllogistic form,
Some P are not M.
All M are S.
Some S are not P.
- After filling in the Venn diagram,
- There is an X on the line between Areas 2 and 5 and between Areas 6 and 7.
- Areas 1 and 4 are shaded, and there is an X on the line between Areas 6 and 7.
- Areas 5 and 6 are shaded, and there is an X in Area 7.
- Areas 1 and 4 are shaded, and there is an X on the line between Areas 3 and 6.
- The syllogism referenced in #6 commits
- illicit minor b. illicit major c. undistributed middle d. is valid
e. Commits Existential fallacy for Aristotle if M equals mermaids.
Given the following syllogism:
All sharks are fish.
All sharks are mammals.
Some mammals are fish.
- The syllogism:
- Is unconditionally valid from the Boolean standpoint.
- Is valid from both the Boolean and the Aristotelian standpoints.
- Commits the existential fallacy from the Aristotelian standpoint only.
- Is valid from the Aristotelian standpoint only.
- Recreate a Categorical Syllogism of the form: AAI â€“ 4. (3 points)
- Is the syllogism in #9 valid for Boole? (2 points)
- In #9, what is the superfluous term? (2 points)
- Major term b. Minor term c. Middle term
- Create a syllogism that is invalid due to exclusive premises. (2 points)
- Create a syllogism that is unconditionally valid. (2 points)
- Create a syllogism that is invalid for Aristotle due to the existential fallacy only AND has the major term distributed superfluously. You must tell me what the invalid term represents (10 points)
- Create a syllogism that is valid and has an E claim as the conclusion. (5 points)
- Is the following argument reducible to a valid argument? You must show your work and explain what you did. (10 points): Some non-swimmers are people who sink, since some people who do not sink are people who float, and all people who float are swimmers.
- Give me an example of a sorities that is arranged in the correct order and has at least 5 claims. Please explain your example. ( 10 points)
Need help with writing logic?Get help