Blog

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.

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. For the six years prior to the survey, Kansans had polled as consistently against requiring background checks for all gun sales, primarily because laws of this sort would punish law-abiding gun owners who might want to sell their firearms to other law-abiding gun owners.

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 analogy argument is a form of argument in support of something controversial that involves setting alongside the controversial case something else less controversial but analogous to it

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) A definition of a term is a claim that indicates something true about each and every thing to which the term applies.

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: In September 2019, each student in Mrs. Newsome’s first grade class (Hank James Elementary in Woolett, Massachusetts) was given three 2 oz. scoops of ice cream: one vanilla, one chocolate, and one bubble-gum tutti frutti.  2 of the 26 students preferred chocolate, 4 preferred vanilla, and 20 preferred bubble-gum tutti frutti.  Researchers concluded that, with respect to ice cream flavors, American children prefer bubble gum tutti frutti to chocolate or vanilla. Consider the following modification of the argument, and indicate 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.  Then explain why you think this is so: The pink dye in the bubble gum tutti frutti ice cream is a substance known to the state of California to cause cancer.

Consider the following example of inductive reasoning: In September 2019, each student in Mrs. Newsome’s first grade class (Hank James Elementary in Woolett, Massachusetts) was given three 2 oz. scoops of ice cream: one vanilla, one chocolate, and one bubble-gum tutti frutti.  2 of the 26 students preferred chocolate, 4 preferred vanilla, and 20 preferred bubble-gum tutti frutti.  Researchers concluded that, with respect to ice cream flavors, American children prefer bubble gum tutti frutti to chocolate or vanilla. Consider the following modification of the argument, and indicate 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.  Then explain why you think this is so: The 26 test subjects were selected not just from the first grade, but from the school’s second through fifth grades as well.