Blog

For the following argument, do three things: (1) identify the terms of the argument, assigning them symbols; (2) set the syllogism out in standard AEIO form, marking the distributed terms with asterisks; and (3) say whether or not the argument is valid, explaining how one of the validity rules is violated if it is invalid.  If the argument is an enthymeme, complete it, if possible, to make come out valid.  (2 points for the symbolization, 4 points for standard form, 4 points for the evaluation, 10 points total) Only a socialist would support extending medical care to the lazy poor.  But this is just what Obama’s was for!  So he must have been a socialist.

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University conducted their 2019 Kansas Speaks fall survey from August 26 to October 14, 2019.  A random sample of 352 adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older were surveyed by telephone (landline and cell phone) to assess their attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens.  This was a 16% response rate, meaning that 2200 calls were attempted.  Among the data generated by the survey, 88.1% of the respondents supported “requiring background checks on all gun sales” (73.5% “strongly support,” and 14.6% “somewhat support”).  They concluded that if all adult Kansas residents were surveyed, it is 95% probable that these findings (88.1% in favor; 73.5 % strongly, 14.6% somewhat) would be found, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.2%.  In other words, they were highly confident that support among Kansans for requiring background checks on all gun sales fell in the range of 82.9% to 93.3%. Given the following modification of the argument, indicate two things: (1) if it strengthens the argument (makes it more likely that the conclusion is true), weakens the argument (makes this less likely), or has no effect, and (2) why you think this is so. The conclusion was changed to “most Kansans support requiring background checks on all gun sales.”

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University conducted their 2019 Kansas Speaks fall survey from August 26 to October 14, 2019.  A random sample of 352 adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older were surveyed by telephone (landline and cell phone) to assess their attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens.  This was a 16% response rate, meaning that 2200 calls were attempted.  Among the data generated by the survey, 88.1% of the respondents supported “requiring background checks on all gun sales” (73.5% “strongly support,” and 14.6% “somewhat support”).  They concluded that if all adult Kansas residents were surveyed, it is 95% probable that these findings (88.1% in favor; 73.5 % strongly, 14.6% somewhat) would be found, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.2%.  In other words, they were highly confident that support among Kansans for requiring background checks on all gun sales fell in the range of 82.9% to 93.3%. Given the following modification of the argument, indicate two things: (1) if it strengthens the argument (makes it more likely that the conclusion is true), weakens the argument (makes this less likely), or has no effect, and (2) why you think this is so. After analyzing the data, it was determined that Johnson County, which comprises 20.52% of the overall state population, only provided 11.93% of the survey sample.

For the following argument, do two things: (1) analyze it in terms of new case, comparison cases, known similarities, and inferred similarity, and (2) indicate what seems to you the most significant relevant dissimilarity between the new case and the sample cases.  (2 points for each of the five items, 10 points total) Just as infectious diseases such as malaria and polio can be prevented with vaccines, so pregnancies can be prevented with birth control pills.  Since pregnancy interferes with a girl’s studies, just as a major disease would, we should require high school girls to be on birth control.  It should be like kids getting their shots.

You must take the exam alone. You will have 125 minutes to complete the exam. The exam must be completed in one sitting. If time runs out, the exam will be automatically submitted. If you leave before completing the exam, you will not be able to reenter. You may not consult with others during the exam. All other computers and cell phones in your room must be shut off during the exam. You may not share exam questions with others without the instructor’s permission. Remember to click “Submit” when you are done.

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University conducted their 2019 Kansas Speaks fall survey from August 26 to October 14, 2019.  A random sample of 352 adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older were surveyed by telephone (landline and cell phone) to assess their attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens.  This was a 16% response rate, meaning that 2200 calls were attempted.  Among the data generated by the survey, 88.1% of the respondents supported “requiring background checks on all gun sales” (73.5% “strongly support,” and 14.6% “somewhat support”).  They concluded that if all adult Kansas residents were surveyed, it is 95% probable that these findings (88.1% in favor; 73.5 % strongly, 14.6% somewhat) would be found, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.2%.  In other words, they were highly confident that support among Kansans for requiring background checks on all gun sales fell in the range of 82.9% to 93.3%. Given the following modification of the argument, indicate two things: (1) if it strengthens the argument (makes it more likely that the conclusion is true), weakens the argument (makes this less likely), or has no effect, and (2) why you think this is so. Most Kansans have fired a gun, and over 30% own a gun.

For the following defective definition, indicate if it is too broad, too narrow, circular, or some combination of the three.  If it is too broad or too narrow, demonstrate the problem with an example of what the proposed definition wrongly applies to or fails to apply to.  If it is circular, explain what you are thinking. (4 points) An argument is a series of true claims (the premises) offered in support of a further claim (the conclusion). 

For the following argument, do two things: (1) analyze it in terms of new case, comparison cases, known similarities, and inferred similarity, and (2) indicate what seems to you the most significant relevant dissimilarity between the new case and the sample cases.  (2 points for each of the five items, 10 points total) Parents are largely free to raise their children as they see fit.  If they want them to practice Islam, they have them practice Islam.  If they want them to learn Chinese, they teach them Chinese.  If they want them to play soccer, they teach them soccer.  If they want them to dress in yellow pinafores, they dress them in yellow pinafores.  If they want them to each oranges, they have them eat oranges.  And so on.  Basically, parents get to shape their children’s lives according to their own values and preferences.  Technology is currently being developed that will enable parents to select, not just their children’s “nurture,” but also their “nature,” which is to say, their genotypes (their DNA).  Just as parents should be free to raise their children as they see fit, they should be free to design their children as they see fit.

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University conducted their 2019 Kansas Speaks fall survey from August 26 to October 14, 2019.  A random sample of 352 adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older were surveyed by telephone (landline and cell phone) to assess their attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens.  This was a 16% response rate, meaning that 2200 calls were attempted.  Among the data generated by the survey, 88.1% of the respondents supported “requiring background checks on all gun sales” (73.5% “strongly support,” and 14.6% “somewhat support”).  They concluded that if all adult Kansas residents were surveyed, it is 95% probable that these findings (88.1% in favor; 73.5 % strongly, 14.6% somewhat) would be found, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.2%.  In other words, they were highly confident that support among Kansans for requiring background checks on all gun sales fell in the range of 82.9% to 93.3%. Given the following modification of the argument, indicate two things: (1) if it strengthens the argument (makes it more likely that the conclusion is true), weakens the argument (makes this less likely), or has no effect, and (2) why you think this is so. 2200 calls were attempted, and 510 people responded.

For the following argument, do three things: (1) identify the terms of the argument, assigning them symbols; (2) set the syllogism out in standard AEIO form, marking the distributed terms with asterisks; and (3) say whether or not the argument is valid, explaining how one of the validity rules is violated if it is invalid.  If the argument is an enthymeme, complete it, if possible, to make come out valid.  (2 points for the symbolization, 4 points for standard form, 4 points for the evaluation, 10 points total) No name is a predicable.  For names never come in contradictory pairs.  And nothing is a predicable unless it comes in a contradictory pair.