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. Professional Standing - Fame (Ethos)






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






3. If A then B Not A Therefore not B






4. 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






5. Asks - 'what is it?' Involves a question of meaning when a debate turns to the proper definition of terms.






6. _____ said that concerning all things - there are two contradictory arguments that exist in opposition to one another.






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






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






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






10. Taking the absence of evidence against something as justification for believing that thing is true.






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






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






13. 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.






14. beginning repeated at ending






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






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






17. 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?






18. Is a variation of the tu quoque; it is when you justify a wrong by saying that most other people do it too.






19. Repetition of the endings of successive clauses - sentences - or lines.






20. 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'






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






22. Good Moral Character






23. 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'






24. 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'






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






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






27. Oral performances that have a set format in which two or more speakers take turns making arguments and counterarguments before an audience - Examples: Court room - candidate debates - academic debates






28. 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?






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






30. Juxtaposition of contrasting words or ideas






31. Oppostite of Litotes






32. Show that an opponent's argument actually supports your side of the debate (often accompanied by a flip in values)






33. A syllogism suppressing the Major Premise - and only contains a Minor Premise and the Conclusion. People speak in these more often than syllogisms.






34. 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






35. Are the terms of the metaphor coherent - or does it tell a story or paint a picure that fails to make sense internally?






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






37. Is the metaphor overused - heard so many times that it becomes tedious rather than persuasive?






38. Value Hierarchy Visualization






39. Understatement






40. Using information from mercenary scientists is committing what fallacy?






41. Opposite of Hyperbole






42. They stablish an arena for argumentation by defining ground for a dispute and issues of controversy. Typically - one side affirms the resolution and one side negates the resolution.






43. 'Bad eggs are all you are likely to get from a bad crow' was said where?






44. Bases inferences on what we know of how people act in a rational/predictable way - in order to determine the truth






45. Grounds ---> Claim | Warrant






46. Uses emotional appeal instead of evidence to argue






47. Honesty - Dedication - Courage (What part of Ethos)






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






49. Set two things in opposition






50. 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: