Test your basic knowledge |

Public Debating

Subject : soft-skills
Instructions:
  • Answer 50 questions in 15 minutes.
  • If you are not ready to take this test, you can study here.
  • Match each statement with the correct term.
  • Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.

This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. Asks - 'is it?' Involves a question of fact (past - present - future)






2. Focuses on inadequacies or problems in the status quo - must be significant if a change is to be made. Must Have: 1. Quantitative significance: affects lots of people 2. Qualitative significance: is of bad quality






3. 'When a qualified person says something is true - it's true' is a warrant for what arg?






4. Exaggeration






5. Usually has three parts: 1. (MP) Major Premise - unequivocal statement 2. (mP) Minor Premise - about a specific case 3. (C) Conclusion - follows necessarily from the premises






6. An irrelevant attack on an opponent rather than on the opponent's evidence or arguments; this is literally translated as an argument 'to the person'






7. The process of using logic to draw conclusions from given facts - definitions - and properties






8. The belief that current thinking - attitudes - values - and actions will continue in the absence of good arguments for their change






9. The inference moves from specific to general or from general to specific. The warrant to this argument usually reads 'what is true in this case is true in general' or 'what is true in general is true in this case'






10. Accepting an argument that you should believe something is true just because the majority believes it is true.






11. Deliberate exaggeration for effect; it is often accomplished via comparisons - similes - and metaphors.






12. 'If two things are alike in most respects - they will be alike in this respect too' Warrant for what arg?






13. It does not follow - Red Herring belongs to this category






14. Any logical system that abstracts the form of statements away from their content in order to establish abstract criteria of consistency and validity






15. Are there enough examples to prove that point? Are the examples skewed toward one type of thing? Are the examples unambiguous? Could it be that the connection of general and specific doesn't hold in this case?






16. The inference reasons from meaning or lesson of a story to a claim. The warrant usually says 'The moral to a story tells us a greater truth'






17. All A are B -no B are C - therefore - no A are C






18. Who developed the argument from general probability?






19. Understatement






20. Does one thing really cause the other - or are they merely correlated? Is there another larger cause or series of causes that better explains the effect?






21. Taught by sophists; provides tools to recognize good arguments from bad ones






22. This is the name for fallacies that do not have another name but that involve a claim that does not follow from the premises (e.g. the evidence is not relevant or not appropriate to support the claim). Litterally translated as 'it does not follow -'






23. Repetition of the opening clause or sentence at its ending.






24. A manufactured controversy that is motivated by profit or extreme ideology to intentionally create confusion in the public about an issue of scientific fact that is not in dispute by the scientific community. Used to stop debate at the conjectural le






25. Assuming as a premise some form of the very point that is at issue - the very conclusion we intend to prove. Also called circular reasoning.






26. Demonstrating respect and care for the audience






27. Four categories of the Loci of the Preferable






28. Attempts to assign responsibility for the existence of the ill to the current system. Needs to connect the ill to the policy in order for it to be changed. Must Have: 1. Structural Inherency: bad structure/lack of structure 2. Attitudinal Inherency:






29. What places do procedural stasis usually occupy in an argument?






30. Part of the blame stock issue - the acceptance or obedience to the policy or law makes it ineffective






31. Draws a conclusions about ONE MEMBER of a GROUP based on a general rule about all members






32. What order do definitional and qualitative stasis usually fall into when put into an argument?






33. Agree with the values or goals of the opposition - but then argue that the opposition doesn't do a better job of achieving those values goals






34. Agreeing to some of the arguments made by your opponents so that you can focus on others






35. 'X causes Y' is a warrant for what argument






36. Ending of one repeated at the beginning of another






37. Accepting a token gesture for something more substantive






38. Grounds ---> Claim | Warrant






39. Is a variation of the non sequiter; it is when the irrelevant reason is meant to divert the attention of the audience from the real issue






40. Draws a conclusion about the PARTS of an ENTITY based on knowledge about the whole entity.






41. Fallacious argument from specific to general without sufficient evidence - Draws a conclusion about all the members of a group based on the knowledge of some members






42. Did not pay Corax for sophistry lessons and was taken to court






43. Opposite of Anaphora






44. Values what is concrete rather than what is merely possible






45. Asks - 'who has the authority?' Involves a question of proper procedure.






46. Is another variety of Hasty Generalization. It is when you reason from a sample that is not representative (typical) of the population from which it was drawn.






47. Consistency - Decorum - Refutation Potential - Cliche and Mixed _____ are forms of judging ______(s)






48. If A then B Not A Therefore not B






49. Misrepresenting an opponent's position as more extreme than it really is and then attacking that version - or attacking a weaker opponent while ignoring a stronger one.






50. Ill - Blame - Cure - Cost







Sorry!:) No result found.

Can you answer 50 questions in 15 minutes?


Let me suggest you:

Browse all subjects

Browse all tests

Most popular tests



Major Subjects

Tests & Exams


AP
CLEP
DSST
GRE
SAT
GMAT

Browse all subjects

Browse all tests

Most popular tests