Download Critical Thinking: Exam Questions and Answers and more Exams Creative Thinking in PDF only on Docsity!
WGU D265 OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT 2 LATEST
VERSIONS 2025 CRITICAL THINKING REASON AND
EVIDENCE ACTUAL EXAM COMPLETE 400 QUESTIONS
AND CORRECT DETAILED ANSWERS (VERIFIED
ANSWERS) |ALREADY GRADED A+
Critical Thinking .....ANSWER.....the ability to think carefully about thinking and reasoning—to criticize your own reasoning. Propositions .....ANSWER.....statements that can be true or false Simple Proposition .....ANSWER.....have no internal logical structure, meaning whether they are true or false does not depend on whether a part of them is true or false The sky is blue.
Complex Proposition .....ANSWER.....have internal logical structure, meaning they are composed of simple propositions. The sky is blue, but it does not look blue to me right now. Bad Inferential Structure .....ANSWER.....premises do not demonstrate or support conclusions, premises are true without being compelled to accept the conclusion False Premise .....ANSWER.....premise is false Conclusion Indicators .....ANSWER.....Have the general sense of "I have told you some things, now here is what I want you to believe". Therefore, so, it follows that, hence, thus, entails that, we may conclude that, implies that, wherefore, as a result Premise Indicators .....ANSWER....."from this fact I am going to infer something else Because, for, given that, in that, as, since, as indicated by
Validity .....ANSWER.....property of an argument structure, "this structure is such that if the premises of any argument are true, then the conclusion must be true. Cogent .....ANSWER.....all true premises, and the premises give strong inductive support for the conclusion. Strength .....ANSWER.....in the inductive argument, true premises make the conclusion probably true. Formal .....ANSWER.....refers to the structure of things Formal fallacy of affirming the consequent .....ANSWER.....you have made an argument with bad structure Informal fallacy of straw figure .....ANSWER.....structure of your argument is not what is at issue Affirming the consequent .....ANSWER.....Has a structure that is analogous to the following argument: If I am in New York, then I
am in the United States. I am in the United States. Therefore, I am in New York. Antecedent .....ANSWER.....the part of the statement after the word "if" Consequent .....ANSWER.....the part of the statement after the word "then" Modus Ponens .....ANSWER.....If X, then Y. X. Therefore, Y Modus Tollens .....ANSWER.....If X, then Y. Not Y. Therefore, not X. The Fallacy Fallacy .....ANSWER.....argument is bad, but conclusion is correct Fallacy .....ANSWER.....common mistake in reasoning Bias .....ANSWER.....people are predisposed to arrive at a conclusion Principle of Charity .....ANSWER.....before attributing bias to someone, try to interpret their reasoning in the best possible light
Representative Bias .....ANSWER.....occurs when the similarity of objects or events confuses people's thinking regarding the probability of an outcome. Ad Hominem .....ANSWER.....When someone attacks the arguer instead of the argument Genetic Fallacy .....ANSWER.....Arguer critiques the origin of a claim or argument rather than the claim or argument itself Straw Figure .....ANSWER.....when someone misinterprets someone else's argument or position Red Herring .....ANSWER.....introducing an irrelevant topic and discussing that instead of the topic at hand Appeal to Unqualified Authority .....ANSWER.....trusting an authority on one subject to speak on another subject Appeal to Force .....ANSWER.....if you don't believe this, then you will suffer bad consequences.
Appeal to Consequences .....ANSWER.....an argument that concludes a hypothesis (typically a belief) to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. Equivocation .....ANSWER.....a word used in two different senses. Children are a headache, aspirin makes headaches go away, therefore aspirin will make children go away. Appeal to Ignorance .....ANSWER.....asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven as false. Slippery Slope .....ANSWER.....argument, in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is an argument in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant effect Texas Sharpshooter .....ANSWER.....someone already knows which conclusion they'd like to prove and then selects evidence which supports that conclusion
Example: "What time is it?" is a non-proposition because it's a question. Argument .....ANSWER.....Is like a debate; it's a set of statements aiming to support the conclusion. Example: In a debate, "Cats are great hunters (premise), and Fluffy is a cat (premise), so Fluffy must be a great hunter (conclusion)" is an argument. Non-argument .....ANSWER.....Is just a collection of statements, not trying to persuade, think of it as "statements hanging out." Example: A recipe listing ingredients and instructions isn't trying to persuade; it's a non-argument. Premise .....ANSWER.....Is like the building blocks of an argument; it's a statement used as evidence or support.
Example: In a detective story, "The footprint matches the suspect's shoe (premise)" is evidence in an argument. Conclusion .....ANSWER.....Is like the verdict; it's the statement in an argument that's being argued for, think of it as "what we're trying to conclude." Example: In a courtroom, "Based on the evidence, the defendant is guilty (conclusion)" is what the argument aims to prove. Deductive Argument .....ANSWER.....Is like a puzzle with precise steps; it's when the conclusion absolutely must be true if the premises are true.
Example (Valid): All humans are mammals (premise); I am a human (premise); I am a mammal (conclusion). Invalid .....ANSWER.....Is when the structure is shaky, and the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow. Example (Invalid): All mammals have feathers (premise); Penguins are mammals (premise); Penguins have feathers (conclusion). Sound .....ANSWER.....Is when an deductive argument is both valid (structurally solid) and has true premises. Example (Sound): All birds can fly (premise); A penguin is a bird (premise); Therefore, a penguin can fly (conclusion). Unsound .....ANSWER.....Is when an deductive argument is either invalid, has false premises, or both.
Example (Unsound): All fish can sing (premise); A shark is a fish (premise); Therefore, a shark can sing (conclusion). Strong .....ANSWER.....Is when an inductive argument provides strong evidence for its conclusion. Example (Strong): 95% of observed days in July are sunny (premise); Tomorrow is in July, so it's likely to be sunny (conclusion). Weak .....ANSWER.....Is when an inductive argument provides weak or insufficient evidence. Example (Weak): 50% of observed days in July are sunny (premise); Tomorrow is in July, so it might be sunny, or it might not be (conclusion).
informal fallacy .....ANSWER.....Is like a sneaky trick in an argument; it's an error in reasoning that doesn't follow the rules of logic. Example: "I heard a black cat brings bad luck, so when I saw a black cat, I tripped and fell. It must be true!" — This is an informal fallacy called "post hoc" because it assumes causation without evidence. Formal Fallacy .....ANSWER.....It's an error in the argument's structure, making it invalid. Example: "All humans are animals (premise); All animals are made of cheese (premise); Therefore, all humans are made of cheese (conclusion)" — This is a formal fallacy because the conclusion doesn't logically follow from the premises.
Antecedent .....ANSWER.....The "if" part of a conditional statement. Example: In "If it rains, then I'll bring an umbrella," "It rains" is the antecedent. Consequent .....ANSWER.....The "then" part of a conditional statement. Example: In "If it rains, then I'll bring an umbrella," "I'll bring an umbrella" is the consequent. Modus Ponens .....ANSWER.....It's a valid argument form where if the antecedent is true, the consequent must be true. A valid deductive argument form: If P, then Q. P is true, so Q is true.
concludes that the antecedent is true because the consequent is true. A formal fallacy: If P, then Q. Q is true, so P is true. Example: "I didn't get wet (consequent), so it didn't rain (affirming the consequent)" — This is a fallacy. Denying the Antecedent .....ANSWER....."Denying the 'A'"; it's a fallacy where one mistakenly concludes that the consequent is false because the antecedent is false. A formal fallacy: If P, then Q. Not P is true, so not Q is true. Example: "I didn't bring an umbrella (antecedent), so it must be raining (denying the antecedent)" — This is a fallacy.
The Fallacy Fallacy .....ANSWER....."Falling for Fallacies"; it's a fallacy where one wrongly concludes that an argument is false just because it contains a fallacy. Example: "His argument had a logical fallacy, so everything he said must be wrong (the fallacy fallacy)" — This is a fallacy itself because some parts of an argument could still be valid or true even if a fallacy is present. Credibility of an Information Source .....ANSWER.....The credibility of an information source is like assessing if a superhero is trustworthy; it's the measure of how believable and trustworthy the source is. Example: Imagine a superhero who has a long history of saving the day (credible) versus a new, untested hero (less credible).
