QUIZ 3 (20 short answer questions) Name _______________________________________
ID: 464280 • Letter: Q
Question
QUIZ 3 (20 short answer questions)
Name _______________________________________
1. If x is causally sufficient for y, then it is necessary that y is
___________________________________________________ for x.
2. Construct an evil twin for the following valid argument form:
P1: If Not-A then (B and C)
P2: Not-A
C: B and C
3. Damning evidence might be known by the arguer to whose argument it applies.
(i.) TRUE
(ii.) FALSE
(iii.) Spurious!
4. 1 + 1 = 2 is _____________________________
course.
for getting any grade in this
5. Given a proof by contradiction (PBC) whose support is .4 and whose original premises
are false, the negation of the conclusion (i.) must be true (ii.) cannot be true (iii.) is
perverse (iv.) can't be evaluated for truth.
6. If x is a node in a hierarchically organized tree structure, then it is
________________________________ for all nodes in the tree structure lower than it.
7. P1: 5% of all Rutgers/Newark students will not study this weekend. P2: Sleepy-Head
is a Rutgers/Newark student. What can be concluded about Sleepy-Head from these
premises?
_______________________________________________________________________
_
_______________________________________________________________________
8. (i.) Every (ii.) Not every
(iii.) No
following argument form is valid:
substitution instance of the
P1: If not-q then not-not-p
P2: Not-not-p
C: Not-q
9. When you infer "x is causally sufficient for y" from "x is sufficient for y" without
additional information, you have committed the
_____________________________________________________________________.
10. (i.) Every (ii.) Not every
(iii.) No
following argument form is invalid:
substitution instance of the
P1: If p then not-q
P2: not-not-q
C: not-p
11. Going to the pharmacy AND listening to Beethoven’s music are
________________________________________________
for flying pigs.
12. The reason why a PBC with support 0 is worthless is that
____________________________________ in which the augmented premise set is true,
but you do not know which one it is.
13. When we conjecture x causes y and perform an experiment to prove this is so, how do
we rule out the case that y causes x AND x and y occur at the same time?
_______________________________________________________________________
_
_______________________________________________________________________
_
14. If you encounter a substitution instance of Modus Ponens in which the first premise is
false, is it rational to believe the conclusion?
(i) YES
(ii) NO
(iii) MAYBE
(iv) Indeterminate
15. Suppose that you conduct a poll for a Presidential Election (in the United States) by
going to various educational institutions to interview people working there. Suppose you
have a true random sample of all educational institutions in the United States. Is your poll
subject to the fallacy of bias?
(i) YES
(ii) NO
16. We have no evidence that the NSA monitoring of phone conversations has led to any
curtailment in the democratic life of the nation. We can only conclude that there has been no
curtailment in the democratic life of the nation (Name the fallacy)
___________________________________________________________________________
17. Eating raw liver is better than nothing. Nothing is better than this course. Therefore, eating
raw liver is better than this course (Name the fallacy)
_______________________________________________________________________
18. Swampman beer™ is just so lacking in taste and that’s why you must buy Kronkedman ™
beer. (Name the fallacy)
_____________________________________________________________________________
19. The last three exams were pretty easy and straightforward, so it's a safe bet that tomorrow’s
exam will also be easy and straightforward (Name the fallacy)
____________________________________________________________________________
20. Wherever you go, there you are. It follows that no one ever gets lost
(Name the fallacy)
_____________________________________________________________________________
Explanation / Answer
1) Necessary condition
Explanation:
As per converse relations, If x causally sufficient for y, they y needs to maintain necessary condition with x.
________________________________________________________________________________________
2) If Not-A then (B and C)
Explanation:
Make something infeasible for getting end for any arguments comes valid.
__________________________________________________________________________
3) True:
Explanation:
Damning evidence is capable evidence for the argument, so the argue started by arguer.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
19) Appeal to probability
Explanation:
It is comes under logic because this case arguments granted by probable for something happened in past same thing would happen in future.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
As a request, don't send Multiple question in one post, divided into more parts and send again the unanwered question.