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. 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?






2. Part of blame stock issue - the composition of the policy is flawed






3. A field of scholarship devoted to how arguments work






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






5. All A are B - all C are B - therefore all A are C






6. Faling to bring relevant evidence to bear on an argument






7. Accepting the word of an alleged authority when we should not because the person does not have expertise on this particular issue or s/he cannot be trusted to give an unbiased opinion.






8. Reasoning from case to case






9. Based on the setting - which dictates the ____ ____ used to determine who has won the debate - E.g. Academic Policy Debate: stock issues Criminal Court Case: beyond a reasonable doubt Civil Courtroom: preponderance of evidence This Classroom: were yo






10. Specific evidence or reason to support the claim (often introduced with the words 'because' or 'since')






11. Arguing without evidence that a given event is the first of a series of steps that will inevitably lead to some outcome.






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






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






14. Ending of one repeated at the beginning of another






15. 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






16. 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'






17. A or B Not A Therefore - B






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






19. Oppostite of Litotes






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






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






22. Civil rights - economic justice - environmental stewardship - government as safety net - worker's rights - diversity






23. The opposite of hyperbole - this is a deliberate understatement for effect.






24. The requirement that the opposition responds reasonably to all significant issues presented by the advocate of change.






25. Asks - 'is it?' Involves a question of fact (past - present - future)






26. Value Hierarchy Visualization in terms of high and low values (?/?)






27. What vehicles and tenors share






28. Term with lower (negative) value






29. If A then B Not B Therefore not A






30. Demonstrating respect and care for the audience






31. 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:






32. The proposition or conclusion that the arguer is advancing






33. Who developed the argument from general probability?






34. 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






35. Exaggeration






36. Prolepsis - Direct Refutation - Conceding some points to focus on others - Agree on commonality then refute - and Turn are all examples of _____ ______






37. 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






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






39. 'What is true in this case is true in general' or 'What is true in general is true in this case' Is a warrant for what kind of argument?






40. Use of a word or phrase that could have several meanings






41. Set two things in opposition






42. Ask a rhetorical question






43. Puritan morality - change and progress - equality of opportunity - rejection of authority - achievement and success






44. Qualitative significance is part of what stock issue?






45. 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






46. Juxtaposition of contrasting words or ideas






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






48. 'X is an sign of Y' is what arg's warrant?






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






50. Can the sign be found without the thing for which it stands? Is an alternative explanation of the maning of the sign more credible? Are there countering signs that indicate that his one sign is false?