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. ______ is not: 'not real' - 'mere' or 'empty'






2. If A then B B Therefore - A






3. Deliberate correction






4. These seats or commonplaces of argument suggest inferences that arguers might make that are based on the habits of thought and value hierarchies that everyone shares






5. What kind of commonplaces 'deflect reality'






6. Ammending a term or phrase you have just read






7. Common practice and traditional wisdom fallacies are categories of _____






8. Letters to the editor - group discussions - talk show






9. Inference that allows you to move from grounds to claim (often implied in the argument)






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






11. A field of scholarship devoted to how arguments work






12. Similarity of structure in a pair or series of related words - phrases - or clauses






13. Relative advantages and disadvantages of the new policy. Are the adverse effects going to outweigh the benefits?






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






15. The process of discrediting someone's argument by revealing weaknesses in it or presenting a counterargument






16. The inference reasons that what a trustworthy source says is true. The warrant to this argument usually says - 'When a qualified person says something is true - it's true'






17. Opposite of Epanalepsis






18. The inference compares two similar things - saying that since they are alike in some respects - they are alike in another respect. It can be a figurative analogy or a literal analogy. The warrant usually reads: 'if two things are alike in most respec






19. 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'






20. Arguing that one thing caused another without sufficient evidence of a causal relationship.






21. The inference moves from cause to effect or effect to cause - arguing that something is the direct result of something else. The warrant to this argument is usually formatted as: 'X is a form of Y'






22. Understatement






23. Have both claims - reason - and at least two sides






24. A legitimate generalization is applied to a particular case in an absolute manner






25. An implicit comparison made by referring to one thing as another






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






27. What order does conjectural stasis usually fall in when arguing?






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






29. A metaphor with a vehicle that draws upon a human experience that is universal






30. Term with higher (positive) value






31. Literally - 'wise one' ; taught rhetoric to citizenry






32. Repetition of the ending of one clause or sentence at the beginning of another.






33. Good Moral Character






34. Arguments that are flawed (not from formal logic)






35. Is another variation of the tu quoque; it is when you justify a wrong by saying that this is the way things have always been done






36. Ideas repeated






37. Obligation of the arguer advocating change to overcome the presumption through argument






38. Are the two things really alike - or are there significant differences that might make them unalike in this respect? Are the negative consequences to comparing these two things? Is the analogy clear or confusing?






39. If A then B Not B Therefore not A






40. Providing a response to each reason that an opponent gives






41. Is the metaphor appropriate? The key to ____ is matching strategy to situation.






42. These are commonplaces for argument drawn from the specific set of values shared by a particular community of experience and interest






43. Asks - 'of what kind is it?' Involves a question of the quality of the act - whether it is good or bad.






44. Anticipatory refutation - in which you preempt an opposition argument before it is even offered.






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






46. Taking one idea and dividing it into two parts - disengaging the two resulting ideas - giving a positive value to one (Term II) and a lesser or negative value to the other (Term I). These are often based on the appearance/reality pair.






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






48. Does the moral really follow from the story? Is the narrative plausible and coherent? Are the characterizations consistent?






49. 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'






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