Trivia Quiz On Effective Argumentation!

Approved & Edited by ProProfs Editorial Team
The editorial team at ProProfs Quizzes consists of a select group of subject experts, trivia writers, and quiz masters who have authored over 10,000 quizzes taken by more than 100 million users. This team includes our in-house seasoned quiz moderators and subject matter experts. Our editorial experts, spread across the world, are rigorously trained using our comprehensive guidelines to ensure that you receive the highest quality quizzes.
Learn about Our Editorial Process
| By Sb0705
S
Sb0705
Community Contributor
Quizzes Created: 14 | Total Attempts: 6,989
Questions: 42 | Attempts: 519

SettingsSettingsSettings
Trivia Quiz On Effective Argumentation! - Quiz

Most people do not like to lose or know that they are wrong, and this is one of the reasons why people get into arguments. Arguments are not meant to be won but to pass a point across and come to a common solution. Do you know how to avoid arguments from escalating and ensure you get results? Take up this quiz and get to find out!


Questions and Answers
  • 1. 

    Argumentation is

    • A.

      The thinking we use to analyze what we read, see, and hear in order to arrive at a justified conclusion.

    • B.

      The way we advocate proposals, examine competing ideas, and influence one another.

    • C.

      A hostile confrontation between two or more people.

    • D.

      A form of debating in which a judge makes the final decision.

    • E.

       a claim supported by evidence and reasons for accepting it.

    Correct Answer
    B. The way we advocate proposals, examine competing ideas, and influence one another.
    Explanation
    Argumentation is the process of advocating proposals, examining competing ideas, and influencing one another. It involves presenting logical reasoning and evidence to support a particular position or viewpoint. Through argumentation, individuals engage in thoughtful analysis and evaluation of different perspectives in order to arrive at a well-justified conclusion. It is not a hostile confrontation or a form of debating with a judge making the final decision, but rather a constructive and persuasive exchange of ideas.

    Rate this question:

  • 2. 

    An argument is

    • A.

       the thinking we use to analyze what we read, see and hear in order to arrive at a justified conclusion.

    • B.

      The way in which we use critical thinking to advocate proposals, examine competing ideas, and influence one another.

    • C.

      A hostile confrontation between two or more people.

    • D.

      A form of debating in which a judge makes the final decision.

    • E.

      A claim supported by evidence and reasons for accepting it.

    Correct Answer
    E. A claim supported by evidence and reasons for accepting it.
    Explanation
    An argument is a claim supported by evidence and reasons for accepting it. This means that when making an argument, one presents a statement or proposition and provides evidence and logical reasoning to support it. The purpose of an argument is to persuade others to accept the claim being made. It is not a hostile confrontation or a form of debating where a judge makes the final decision. It is also different from critical thinking, which is the process of analyzing and evaluating information.

    Rate this question:

  • 3. 

    Effective argumentation in groups

    • A.

      Promotes misunderstanding.

    • B.

      Promotes critical thinking.

    • C.

      Prevents persuasion.

    • D.

      Promotes groupthink.

    • E.

       promotes hostility.

    Correct Answer
    B. Promotes critical thinking.
    Explanation
    Effective argumentation in groups promotes critical thinking because when individuals engage in argumentation, they are required to present evidence, analyze different perspectives, and construct logical arguments. This process encourages individuals to think critically about the topic at hand, evaluate different viewpoints, and challenge their own beliefs. Through argumentation, individuals are able to deepen their understanding, consider alternative perspectives, and develop well-reasoned conclusions. Therefore, effective argumentation in groups can enhance critical thinking skills by fostering intellectual engagement, encouraging open-mindedness, and promoting rigorous analysis.

    Rate this question:

  • 4. 

    Argumentativeness is a

    • A.

      Claim supported by evidence and reasons for accepting it.

    • B.

      Process of reasoned interaction intended to help participants make the best decision in a given situation.

    • C.

      Decision based on listening to and analyzing arguments.

    • D.

      Willingness to argue about controversial issues with others.

    • E.

       form of debating in which a judge makes the final decision.

    Correct Answer
    D. Willingness to argue about controversial issues with others.
    Explanation
    The correct answer is "willingness to argue about controversial issues with others." This is because argumentativeness refers to a person's inclination or readiness to engage in arguments or debates, particularly on topics that are contentious or provoke differing opinions. It implies a willingness to express one's views, challenge others' perspectives, and engage in intellectual discourse to explore and understand different viewpoints.

    Rate this question:

  • 5. 

    All of the following traits characterize highly argumentative group members EXCEPT

    • A.

      They promote hostility in the group.

    • B.

      They show genuine interest in the group's discussions.

    • C.

      They focus on issues rather than personalities.

    • D.

       they are often chosen as group leaders.

    • E.

      They are viewed as highly credible members.

    Correct Answer
    A. They promote hostility in the group.
    Explanation
    Highly argumentative group members are known for their ability to engage in debates and discussions, focusing on issues rather than personal attacks. They are often seen as credible members due to their ability to present logical arguments. They may also be chosen as group leaders because of their assertiveness and ability to challenge ideas. However, they do not promote hostility in the group; instead, they contribute to a healthy exchange of ideas and perspectives.

    Rate this question:

  • 6. 

    . Which of the following statements best describes a highly argumentative group member?

    • A.

      The member is not confrontational.

    • B.

      The member has less influence in group decision making.

    • C.

      The member is less likely to be persuaded by others.

    • D.

      The member is less likely to be chosen as the group leader.

    • E.

      All of the above

    Correct Answer
    C. The member is less likely to be persuaded by others.
    Explanation
    A highly argumentative group member is less likely to be persuaded by others. This means that they have strong convictions and are not easily swayed by the opinions or arguments of others. They are likely to hold their ground and defend their own viewpoints, even in the face of opposition or disagreement from the rest of the group. This characteristic suggests that they are assertive and confident in their own ideas, which can contribute to a more dynamic and diverse group discussion.

    Rate this question:

  • 7. 

    . Which component of the Toulmin Model of Argument explains why the evidence supports the claim?

    • A.

      Qualifier

    • B.

      Evidence

    • C.

      Warrant

    • D.

      Backing

    • E.

      Reservation

    Correct Answer
    C. Warrant
    Explanation
    The warrant is the component of the Toulmin Model of Argument that explains why the evidence supports the claim. It provides the reasoning or justification for why the evidence is relevant and valid in supporting the claim. The warrant connects the evidence to the claim and helps to establish a logical and persuasive argument.

    Rate this question:

  • 8. 

    The warrant in an argument answers the question

    • A.

       What makes you say that?

    • B.

       What do you have to go on?

    • C.

      How did you get there?

    • D.

      Are there any exceptions?

    • E.

       What conclusion or position do you advocate

    Correct Answer
    C. How did you get there?
    Explanation
    The warrant in an argument refers to the reasoning or justification behind a claim or belief. It explains how the evidence or premises support the conclusion. When someone asks "How did you get there?", they are essentially asking for the warrant in the argument. They want to understand the thought process and logical steps that led to the conclusion. This question seeks to uncover the reasoning behind the claim being made and encourages the person to provide a logical explanation for their position.

    Rate this question:

  • 9. 

    Which component of the Toulmin Model of Argument is represented in Part I of the following argument? I. Joan would be a good leader. / II. Good leaders are effective communicators. / III. Joan got an A in the communication course she took.

    • A.

      Claim

    • B.

      Evidence

    • C.

      Warrant

    • D.

      Backing

    • E.

      Reservation

    Correct Answer
    A. Claim
    Explanation
    The given argument consists of three statements. The first statement (I. Joan would be a good leader) is the claim being made in the argument. The claim is the main point or assertion that the argument is trying to support or prove. In this case, the claim is that Joan would be a good leader. The other two statements (II. Good leaders are effective communicators and III. Joan got an A in the communication course she took) serve as evidence to support the claim. Therefore, the component of the Toulmin Model of Argument represented in Part I of the argument is the claim.

    Rate this question:

  • 10. 

    . Which component of the Toulmin Model of Argument is represented in Part II of the following argument? I. Joan would be a good leader. / II. Good leaders are effective communicators. / III. Joan got an A in the communication course she took.

    • A.

      Claim

    • B.

      Evidence

    • C.

      Warrant

    • D.

       backing

    • E.

       reservation

    Correct Answer
    C. Warrant
    Explanation
    In Part II of the argument, the statement "Good leaders are effective communicators" serves as the warrant. The warrant is the underlying assumption or principle that connects the evidence to the claim. In this case, the warrant establishes the connection between the evidence (Joan got an A in the communication course she took) and the claim (Joan would be a good leader). It implies that being an effective communicator is a quality that makes someone a good leader.

    Rate this question:

  • 11. 

    Which component of the Toulmin Model of Argument is represented in Part III of the following argument? I. Joan would be a good leader. / II. Good leaders are effective communicators. / III. Joan got an A in the communication course she took.

    • A.

      A. claim

    • B.

      B. evidence

    • C.

      C. warrant

    • D.

      D. qualifier

    • E.

      E. reservation

    Correct Answer
    B. B. evidence
    Explanation
    The correct answer is evidence because Part III of the argument provides specific information (Joan got an A in the communication course she took) to support the claim that Joan would be a good leader. This evidence helps to strengthen the argument by showing that Joan has the necessary skills and qualifications to be an effective communicator, which is a characteristic of a good leader.

    Rate this question:

  • 12. 

    Which component of the Toulmin Model of Argument is indicated by words in a claim such as "likely," "possibly," or "probably"?

    • A.

      A. reservation

    • B.

      B. evidence

    • C.

      C. data

    • D.

      D. qualifier

    • E.

      E. warrant

    Correct Answer
    D. D. qualifier
    Explanation
    The correct answer is d. qualifier. In the Toulmin Model of Argument, a qualifier is a word or phrase used in a claim to indicate the degree of certainty or probability. Words such as "likely," "possibly," or "probably" are qualifiers that suggest that the claim is not absolute and there is some level of uncertainty or possibility involved. The qualifier helps to establish the strength or weakness of the claim and allows for a more nuanced and balanced argument.

    Rate this question:

  • 13. 

    Which of the following answers is an example of the kind of evidence you could use in an argument?

    • A.

      A. facts and opinions

    • B.

      B. definitions and descriptions

    • C.

      C. examples and illustrations

    • D.

      D. statistics

    • E.

      E. all of the above

    Correct Answer
    E. E. all of the above
    Explanation
    All of the options listed (facts and opinions, definitions and descriptions, examples and illustrations, and statistics) can be used as evidence in an argument. Facts and opinions provide concrete information and personal perspectives, definitions and descriptions clarify terms and concepts, examples and illustrations offer real-life instances to support a claim, and statistics present numerical data to strengthen an argument. Therefore, all of these options can be considered valid evidence for supporting an argument.

    Rate this question:

  • 14. 

    "More than 40% of American claim to have read The da Vinci Code.” What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. testimony

    • B.

      B. definition

    • C.

      C. statistic

    • D.

      D. story

    • E.

      E. opinion

    Correct Answer
    C. C. statistic
    Explanation
    The given statement presents a numerical fact about the percentage of Americans who claim to have read The Da Vinci Code. This type of evidence is known as a statistic because it provides quantitative data and supports a claim with numerical evidence.

    Rate this question:

  • 15. 

    "The Biltmore Mansion is the largest private residence in the United States." What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. fact

    • B.

      B. description

    • C.

      C. opinion

    • D.

      D. definition

    • E.

      E. example

    Correct Answer
    A. A. fact
    Explanation
    The statement provided in the question is a factual statement that can be verified and proven to be true. It states that the Biltmore Mansion is the largest private residence in the United States, which can be confirmed by researching the size and status of other private residences in the country. Therefore, the type of evidence used in this example is a fact.

    Rate this question:

  • 16. 

    . "Sufism is not a sect of Islam, like Shiism or Shunnism, but rather the mystical sides of Islam: a personal, experiential approach to Allah, which contrasts with the more prescriptive, doctrinal approach of fundamentalism like the Taliban." What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. definition

    • B.

      B. illustration

    • C.

      C. fact

    • D.

      D. description

    • E.

      E. statistic

    Correct Answer
    D. D. description
    Explanation
    The given statement provides a description of Sufism, explaining that it is the mystical side of Islam and contrasts with the more prescriptive approach of fundamentalism like the Taliban. The evidence used in this example is a description because it provides an explanation and characterization of Sufism.

    Rate this question:

  • 17. 

    The Wings of Freedom tour includes 3 famous World War II vintage airplanes: a B-17 Flying Fortress, a B-24 Liberator, and a North American P-51. What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. definition

    • B.

      B. opinion

    • C.

      C. statistic

    • D.

      D. illustration

    • E.

      E. example

    Correct Answer
    E. E. example
    Explanation
    This question asks about the type of evidence used in the given example. The example provided is the Wings of Freedom tour, which includes three famous World War II vintage airplanes. This example is used to illustrate the types of airplanes included in the tour. Therefore, the correct answer is e. example.

    Rate this question:

  • 18. 

    "Horsepower is a unit for measuring the power of engines roughly equal to 746 watts or 33,000 foot-pounds per minute. " What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. example

    • B.

      B. definition

    • C.

      C. illustration

    • D.

      D. opinion

    • E.

      E. statistic

    Correct Answer
    B. B. definition
    Explanation
    The given explanation is a definition because it provides a clear and concise explanation of what horsepower is and how it is measured. It defines horsepower as a unit for measuring engine power, providing the specific conversion to watts and foot-pounds per minute. This definition helps to clarify the meaning and measurement of horsepower.

    Rate this question:

  • 19. 

    The president and chief executive of a virtual web space in which users can share comments claims that "The best innovations occur when you have networks of people with diverse backgrounds gathering around a problem." What type of evidence is used in this example?

    • A.

      A. fact

    • B.

      B. statistic

    • C.

      C. illustration

    • D.

      D. opinion

    • E.

      E. example

    Correct Answer
    D. D. opinion
    Explanation
    The given correct answer is "d. opinion". This is because the statement made by the president and chief executive is subjective and based on their personal belief or viewpoint. It cannot be proven as a fact or supported by statistics or illustrations. It is an expression of their opinion on how the best innovations occur.

    Rate this question:

  • 20. 

    "According to NORML (National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws), marijuana is a harmless drug that has no long-term side effects." What criticism should be made about this piece of evidence?

    • A.

      A. It's not recent.

    • B.

      B. It's not statistically valid.

    • C.

      C. It's biased.

    • D.

      D. It's not identified.

    • E.

      E. It's not consistent.

    Correct Answer
    C. C. It's biased.
    Explanation
    The criticism that should be made about this piece of evidence is that it is biased. The statement is from NORML, an organization that advocates for the reform of marijuana laws, which suggests that their perspective may not be objective. Therefore, the evidence may not provide a balanced or unbiased view of the potential harms or side effects of marijuana.

    Rate this question:

  • 21. 

    "According to a 1984 article in the Midland Times Herald, gang activity is not a significant problem in the community." What criticism should be made about this piece of evidence?

    • A.

      A. It's not recent.

    • B.

      B. It's not statistically valid.

    • C.

      C. It's biased.

    • D.

      D. It's not identified d. It's not identified

    • E.

      E. It's not consistent.

    Correct Answer
    A. A. It's not recent.
    Explanation
    The criticism that should be made about this piece of evidence is that it's not recent. The fact that the article was published in 1984 means that the information may no longer be accurate or relevant to the current situation. Gang activity could have changed significantly since then, making this evidence outdated.

    Rate this question:

  • 22. 

    . Paulo survived a car crash without any major injury while not wearing a seatbelt. If he uses this example to prove that seatbelts are not needed, he has failed to test his evidence for

    • A.

      A. consistency.

    • B.

      B. relevancy.

    • C.

      C. recency.

    • D.

      D. credibility.

    • E.

      E. interest.

    Correct Answer
    A. A. consistency.
    Explanation
    Paulo's example of surviving a car crash without wearing a seatbelt does not demonstrate consistency. In order to test the evidence, Paulo would need to consider whether his example is consistent with other similar cases and statistics. If he only relies on his own experience without considering the broader evidence that shows the importance of seatbelts in preventing injuries, he has failed to test his evidence for consistency.

    Rate this question:

  • 23. 

    You should ask all of the following questions when trying to determine the objectivity or accuracy of evidence from an internet source EXCEPT

    • A.

      A. Is statistical data well labeled and easy to read?

    • B.

      B. Are the sources of information available so you can verify their claims?

    • C.

      C. Does it account for opposing points of view?

    • D.

      D. Is the information free of grammatical, spelling, and typographical errors that could indicate a lack of quality control?

    • E.

      E. Do you agree with the source's claims and point of view?

    Correct Answer
    E. E. Do you agree with the source's claims and point of view?
    Explanation
    The given correct answer is "e. Do you agree with the source's claims and point of view?" This question is not relevant when determining the objectivity or accuracy of evidence from an internet source. It is important to evaluate the statistical data labeling, availability of sources, consideration of opposing points of view, and the presence of grammatical errors to assess the credibility and reliability of the information. However, personal agreement with the source's claims and point of view does not necessarily determine the objectivity or accuracy of the evidence.

    Rate this question:

  • 24. 

    "Sex education in schools promotes teenage promiscuity." This statement is an example of a claim of

    • A.

      A. fact.

    • B.

      B. conjecture.

    • C.

      C. value.

    • D.

      D. policy.

    • E.

      E. fiction.

    Correct Answer
    A. A. fact.
    Explanation
    This statement is an example of a claim of fact because it is presenting a statement as if it is true or false and can be proven or disproven based on evidence and data. It is asserting that sex education in schools promotes teenage promiscuity, suggesting that this is a factual claim that can be supported or refuted through research and evidence.

    Rate this question:

  • 25. 

     "Our town should enact a curfew for all juveniles." This statement is an example of

    • A.

      A. fact.

    • B.

      B. conjecture.

    • C.

      C. policy.

    • D.

      D. value.

    • E.

      E. fiction.

    Correct Answer
    C. C. policy.
    Explanation
    The statement "Our town should enact a curfew for all juveniles" is an example of a policy. A policy is a course of action or principle that is proposed or implemented by an organization or government. In this case, the statement suggests a specific action (enacting a curfew) that should be taken by the town. It is not a fact because it is a subjective opinion, not based on verifiable evidence. It is also not a conjecture, value, or fiction as it does not involve speculation, personal beliefs, or imaginary content.

    Rate this question:

  • 26. 

    "Our group is the best in the class." This statement is an example of a claim of

    • A.

      A. fact.

    • B.

      B. conjecture.

    • C.

      C. policy.

    • D.

      D. value.

    • E.

      E. fiction.

    Correct Answer
    D. D. value.
    Explanation
    The statement "Our group is the best in the class" is an example of a claim of value because it expresses a subjective judgment or opinion about the superiority of the group. It is not a statement of fact that can be objectively proven or disproven.

    Rate this question:

  • 27. 

    . When presenting an argument, in which order should you use the following steps?

    • A.

      A. summarize your argument, provide reasons, support your claim, state your claim

    • B.

      B. support your claim, summarize your argument, state your claim, provide reasons

    • C.

      C. state your claim, support your claim, provide reasons, summarize your argument

    • D.

      D. provide reasons, summarize your argument, state your claim, support your claim

    • E.

      E. state your claim, summarize your argument, provide reasons, support your claim

    Correct Answer
    C. C. state your claim, support your claim, provide reasons, summarize your argument
    Explanation
    When presenting an argument, it is important to first state your claim to clearly communicate your position. Then, you should support your claim by providing evidence or examples to back it up. After that, you should provide reasons to explain why your claim is valid and logical. Finally, you should summarize your argument to bring all the points together and reinforce your claim. This order allows for a clear and logical progression of ideas, making it easier for the audience to understand and accept your argument.

    Rate this question:

  • 28. 

    . The act of proving an argument either erroneous or false, or both, is defined as

    • A.

      A. argumentation.

    • B.

      B. refutation.

    • C.

      C. argumentativeness.

    • D.

      D. reasoning.

    • E.

      E. cooperative argumentation.

    Correct Answer
    B. B. refutation.
    Explanation
    Refutation refers to the act of proving an argument to be erroneous or false. It involves presenting evidence or counterarguments that contradict the original argument, thereby weakening or disproving it. This process is essential in critical thinking and debate, as it helps to identify flaws or weaknesses in an argument and promotes the development of stronger, more valid arguments.

    Rate this question:

  • 29. 

    What are the first 4 steps in refuting an argument?

    • A.

      A. state the claim you oppose, assess the evidence, assess the reasoning, summarize your refutation

    • B.

      B. listen to the argument, assess the evidence, state the claim you oppose, give an overview of your objections

    • C.

      C. give an overview of your objections, assess the evidence, state the claim you oppose, summarize your refutation

    • D.

      D. listen to the argument, assess the evidence, assess the reasoning, state the claim you oppose

    • E.

      E. summarize your claim, provide reasoning, state your claim, support your claim

    Correct Answer
    B. B. listen to the argument, assess the evidence, state the claim you oppose, give an overview of your objections
    Explanation
    The first step in refuting an argument is to listen to the argument being presented. This allows you to fully understand the opposing viewpoint. The second step is to assess the evidence provided in support of the argument. This involves critically analyzing the quality and relevance of the evidence presented. The third step is to state the claim you oppose, clearly articulating the specific viewpoint or argument that you are refuting. Finally, you should give an overview of your objections, summarizing the main points that counter the argument being made.

    Rate this question:

  • 30. 

    Which step in refuting an argument would be characterized by a statement such as "I don't support the increase in student activity fees for 2 reasons: the college just raised tuition 5%, and the poor economy has stressed many students and their parents to the limit"?

    • A.

      A. assess the reasoning

    • B.

      B. state the opposing claim

    • C.

      C. assess the evidence

    • D.

      D. listen to the argument

    • E.

      E. preview your objections

    Correct Answer
    E. E. preview your objections
    Explanation
    The given statement is an example of previewing objections in refuting an argument. In this step, one anticipates and presents their objections to the argument by highlighting specific reasons or evidence that contradict the claim. In this case, the speaker is previewing their objections by stating two reasons why they don't support the increase in student activity fees, which are the recent tuition raise and the financial strain on students and their parents due to the poor economy.

    Rate this question:

  • 31. 

    "My opponent says we can lower taxes. He can't be believed or trusted. Ten years ago, he admitted to being an alcoholic. “What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. faulty cause

    • B.

      B. hasty generalization

    • C.

      C. appeal to popularity

    • D.

      D. appeal to authority

    • E.

      E. ad hominem attack

    Correct Answer
    E. E. ad hominem attack
    Explanation
    In this statement, the speaker tries to discredit their opponent's argument by attacking their personal character rather than addressing the issue at hand. By bringing up their opponent's past admission of being an alcoholic, the speaker is attempting to undermine their credibility and make it seem like their argument about lowering taxes cannot be trusted. This is an example of an ad hominem attack, which is a fallacy that involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.

    Rate this question:

  • 32. 

    Some group members have suggested that the company sponsor an annual picnic rather than a more formal annual dinner. John disagrees with the others because the company has held a formal dinner every year for more than 10 years. Which fallacy of argument could be attributed to John's comment?

    • A.

      A. ad hominem attack

    • B.

      B. appeal to authority

    • C.

      C. appeal to popularity

    • D.

      D. appeal to tradition

    • E.

      E. faulty cause

    Correct Answer
    D. D. appeal to tradition
    Explanation
    John's comment can be attributed to the fallacy of argument known as appeal to tradition. He is using the fact that the company has held a formal dinner every year for more than 10 years as a reason to disagree with the suggestion of having an annual picnic. This fallacy assumes that something should continue to be done in a certain way simply because it has been done that way in the past, without considering whether it is the best or most appropriate option.

    Rate this question:

  • 33. 

    . "My uncle's visit to New Mexico was horrible. The weather was bad and the people were unfriendly. New Mexico is not a good choice for a vacation." What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. ad hominem attack

    • B.

      B. hasty generalization

    • C.

      C. appeal to popularity

    • D.

      D. faulty analogy

    • E.

      E. faulty cause

    Correct Answer
    B. B. hasty generalization
    Explanation
    The fallacy being committed in this statement is a hasty generalization. The person is making a general conclusion about New Mexico based on a single negative experience with bad weather and unfriendly people. This is an example of hasty generalization because it is not fair or accurate to judge an entire location based on limited and isolated incidents.

    Rate this question:

  • 34. 

    "Everyone in our group has signing the petition. You should, too." What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. ad hominem attack

    • B.

      B. appeal to authority

    • C.

      C. appeal to popularity

    • D.

      D. appeal to tradition

    • E.

      E. none of the above

    Correct Answer
    C. C. appeal to popularity
    Explanation
    The fallacy being committed in this statement is an appeal to popularity. The speaker is suggesting that because everyone in their group has signed the petition, the listener should also do so. This argument is flawed because the popularity of an idea or action does not necessarily make it correct or valid. The speaker is using the number of people who have signed as a persuasive tactic, rather than providing logical or factual reasons for signing the petition.

    Rate this question:

  • 35. 

    "I knew I wouldn't win the lottery because a black cat crossed my path right after I bought the ticket." What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. ad hominem attack

    • B.

      B. appeal to authority

    • C.

      C. appeal to tradition

    • D.

      D. faulty analogy

    • E.

      E. faulty cause

    Correct Answer
    E. E. faulty cause
    Explanation
    The fallacy being committed in this statement is a faulty cause. The person is assuming that the black cat crossing their path after buying the lottery ticket caused them to not win the lottery. However, there is no logical connection between these two events. The presence of a black cat has no influence on the outcome of a lottery draw. This is an example of a superstitious belief and a false cause-effect relationship.

    Rate this question:

  • 36. 

    . "If lawyers develop their cases with help from other lawyers, why can't I write my term paper with help from other students?" What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. appeal to authority

    • B.

      B. hasty generalization

    • C.

      C. faulty cause

    • D.

      D. faulty analogy

    • E.

      E. ad hominem attack

    Correct Answer
    D. D. faulty analogy
    Explanation
    The fallacy being committed in this statement is a faulty analogy. The statement is comparing the development of cases by lawyers with the writing of a term paper by a student. While lawyers seeking help from other lawyers is a common practice in the legal field, it does not necessarily mean that students seeking help from other students is acceptable or equivalent. The two situations have different contexts, standards, and expectations, making the analogy faulty.

    Rate this question:

  • 37. 

    . "Don't go to that restaurant. I went once, and the service was awful." What fallacy is being committed in this statement?

    • A.

      A. appeal to tradition

    • B.

      B. faulty analogy

    • C.

      C. hasty generalization

    • D.

      D. faulty cause

    • E.

      E. appeal to authority

    Correct Answer
    C. C. hasty generalization
    Explanation
    The fallacy being committed in this statement is a hasty generalization. The person is making a general conclusion about the restaurant's service based on just one visit. This is an example of jumping to a conclusion without sufficient evidence or a representative sample. It is possible that the person had a bad experience on that particular visit, but it does not necessarily mean that the service is always awful at the restaurant.

    Rate this question:

  • 38. 

     According to your textbook, one of the most significant cultural differences in argumentation is the way in which people use evidence to support a claim. In which of the following cultures is physical evidence often rejected because no connection is seen between the physical world and human actions?

    • A.

      A. some African cultures

    • B.

      B. Chinese culture

    • C.

      C. European-American cultures

    • D.

      D. highly religious Muslim culture

    • E.

      E. highly religious Christian culture

    Correct Answer
    B. B. Chinese culture
    Explanation
    In Chinese culture, physical evidence is often rejected because no connection is seen between the physical world and human actions. This cultural difference in argumentation is highlighted in the textbook as one of the most significant.

    Rate this question:

  • 39. 

    According to Rybacki and Rybacki, the reasoning responsibility requires that ethical group members

    • A.

      A. avoid making arguments containing fallacies.

    • B.

      B. reveal the sources of information so others can evaluate them.

    • C.

      C. consider the interests of those affected by a decision.

    • D.

      D. treat other group members as equals.

    • E.

      E. respect established group norms.

    Correct Answer
    A. A. avoid making arguments containing fallacies.
    Explanation
    Ethical group members are expected to avoid making arguments containing fallacies according to Rybacki and Rybacki. This means that they should strive to present logical and rational arguments that are free from any errors or misleading information. By avoiding fallacies, group members can ensure that their arguments are valid and based on sound reasoning, which promotes ethical communication and decision-making within the group.

    Rate this question:

  • 40. 

    . According to Rybacki and Rybacki, the social code responsibility requires that ethical group members

    • A.

      A. avoid making arguments containing fallacies.

    • B.

      B. reveal the sources of information so others can evaluate them.

    • C.

      C. consider the interests of those affected by a decision.

    • D.

      D. treat other group members as equals.

    • E.

      E. respect established group norms.

    Correct Answer
    D. D. treat other group members as equals.
    Explanation
    The correct answer is d. treat other group members as equals. According to Rybacki and Rybacki, the social code responsibility requires ethical group members to treat other group members as equals. This means that they should not discriminate or show favoritism towards any member of the group based on factors such as race, gender, or social status. Treating others as equals promotes fairness, inclusivity, and a sense of belonging within the group. It also fosters a positive and cooperative group dynamic, allowing for effective collaboration and decision-making.

    Rate this question:

  • 41. 

    Emotional intelligence can benefit a group engaged in argumentation because members will strive to

    • A.

      A. state arguments in a neutral rather than a combative tone of voice.

    • B.

      B. show they are willing to work things out by talking over the issue rather than escalating it.

    • C.

      C. calm down, tune in to their feelings, and be willing to share them with group members.

    • D.

      D. look for an equitable way to resolve the dispute.

    • E.

      E. all of the above

    Correct Answer
    E. E. all of the above
    Explanation
    Emotional intelligence can benefit a group engaged in argumentation because members will strive to state arguments in a neutral rather than a combative tone of voice. They will also show they are willing to work things out by talking over the issue rather than escalating it. Additionally, they will calm down, tune in to their feelings, and be willing to share them with group members. Lastly, they will look for an equitable way to resolve the dispute. Therefore, all of the options mentioned above contribute to the benefits of emotional intelligence in argumentation.

    Rate this question:

  • 42. 

    All of the following traits are characteristic of emotional intelligence EXCEPT

    • A.

      A. empathy.

    • B.

      B. self-awareness.

    • C.

      C. self-regulation.

    • D.

      D. self-confidence.

    • E.

      E. self-assertion.

    Correct Answer
    E. E. self-assertion.
    Explanation
    The traits listed in options a, b, c, and d are all characteristic of emotional intelligence. Empathy refers to the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. Self-awareness is the ability to recognize and understand one's own emotions. Self-regulation is the ability to control and manage one's emotions. Self-confidence is having a belief in one's own abilities. However, self-assertion, which refers to forcefully expressing one's own needs and opinions, is not typically considered a characteristic of emotional intelligence.

    Rate this question:

Quiz Review Timeline +

Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.

  • Current Version
  • Mar 19, 2023
    Quiz Edited by
    ProProfs Editorial Team
  • Aug 02, 2012
    Quiz Created by
    Sb0705
Back to Top Back to top
Advertisement
×

Wait!
Here's an interesting quiz for you.

We have other quizzes matching your interest.