SUBJECTS
|
BROWSE
|
CAREER CENTER
|
POPULAR
|
JOIN
|
LOGIN
Business Skills
|
Soft Skills
|
Basic Literacy
|
Certifications
About
|
Help
|
Privacy
|
Terms
|
Email
Search
Test your basic knowledge |
Public Debating
Start Test
Study First
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. Any logical system that abstracts the form of statements away from their content in order to establish abstract criteria of consistency and validity
Formal Logic
Testimony
Epistrophe
Denying the Antecedent (INVALID)
2. Opposite of Hyperbole
Sound
Formal Debate
Litotes
Hypothetical (Syllogism)
3. An argument that follows proper logical form
Categorical (Syllogism)
Decorum
Valid
Composition
4. Are the terms of the metaphor coherent - or does it tell a story or paint a picure that fails to make sense internally?
Categorical (Syllogism)
Tu Quoque
Consistency
Epanalepsis
5. Ill - Blame - Cure - Cost
Composition
Stock Issues
(Evaluation Criteria for) Value-Oriented Arguments
Analogy
6. Value Hierarchy Visualization in terms of high and low values (?/?)
(Argument from) Narrative
Formal Debate
Nonassociated (commonplaces)
Less Valued Term/Higher Valued Term
7. When more than one vehicle is used for the same tenor - and those vehicles appear in close proximity to each other
(Argument of ) General probability
Erotema
Mixed Metaphor
Rhetoric
8. Asks - 'who has the authority?' Involves a question of proper procedure.
Erotema
Parallelism
Procedural (Stasis)
Culturetypal (Metaphor)
9. A metaphor with a vehicle that draws upon a human experience that is universal
Checking for Analogy argument
Isocrates
(Argument from) Sign
Archetypal (Metaphor)
10. An argument that either lacks validity - soundness or both.
Hasty Generalization
Disassociation of Concepts
Formal Debate
Unsound
11. What places do procedural stasis usually occupy in an argument?
Epanalepsis
Ad Populum
Appeal to Ignorance
Second (or) Third
12. The requirement that the opposition responds reasonably to all significant issues presented by the advocate of change.
Affirming the Consequent (INVALID)
Good Moral Character
Burden of Rejoinder
(Argument from) Cause
13. Defending something by pointing out that your opponent did it as well. Also called 'two wrongs make a right'; this is literally translated as 'thou also'
Tu Quoque
Term I/Term II
(Argument from) Sign
Vehicle (and) Tenor
14. Opposite of Anaphora
Second (or) Third
Epistrophe
(Special Topoi for) Republicans
Traditional Wisdom (Fallacy)
15. 'The moral to a story tells us a greater truth' is a warrant for what arg?
Ill
Antithesis
Narrative
Good Moral Character
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'
Presumption
Division
Cliche
(Argument from) Narrative
17. Value Hierarchy Visualization
Begging the Question
Invalid (Categorical Syllogism)
Cost
Term I/Term II
18. Arguments that are flawed (not from formal logic)
Example
Fallacies
Anadiplosis
Exergasia
19. Did not pay Corax for sophistry lessons and was taken to court
Tisias
Ethos
Formal Logic
Unequivocal
20. Associated words or ideas with a vehicle or tenor
Common Practice (Fallacy)
Locus of Quantity
Commonplaces
Aristotle
21. Understatement
Hasty Generalization
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Slippery Slope (Fallacy)
Litotes
22. Erroneously accusing others of fallacious reasoning
Euphimism
False Charge of Fallacy
Hasty Generalization
Charisma
23. Agreeing to some of the arguments made by your opponents so that you can focus on others
(Argument from) Narrative
Invalid (Categorical Syllogism)
Grounds (or data)
Conceding Arguments
24. Is a variation of the tu quoque; it is when you justify a wrong by saying that most other people do it too.
Ad Hominem
Common Practice (Fallacy)
Litotes
Red Herring
25. Prolepsis - Direct Refutation - Conceding some points to focus on others - Agree on commonality then refute - and Turn are all examples of _____ ______
Refutation Strategies
Blame
Burden of Rejoinder
Charisma
26. What vehicles and tenors share
Cause 9Arguing that something caused something else)
Anadiplosis
Traditional Wisdom (Fallacy)
Associated Commonplaces
27. Literally - 'wise one' ; taught rhetoric to citizenry
(Fallacy of) Accident
Accident
Litotes
Sophist
28. Deliberate correction
(Special Topoi for) Science
Charisma
Sign
Correctio
29. The proposition or conclusion that the arguer is advancing
Claim
Unsound
Locus of Quantity
Stasis
30. Values what is concrete rather than what is merely possible
Locus of Existence
Non Sequitur
Vehicle (and) Tenor
Erotema
31. Draws a conclusions about ONE MEMBER of a GROUP based on a general rule about all members
Manufactroversy
Accident
(Special Topoi for) Science
Appeal to Authority
32. ______ is not: 'not real' - 'mere' or 'empty'
Example
Rhetoric
Good Moral Character
Litotes
33. 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
Decision Rules
Denying the Antecedent (INVALID)
Tu Quoque
Manufactroversy
34. 1. Applying the tests of reasoning to show weaknesses in arguments and develop counterarguments 2. Accusing opponent of using fallacious reasoning 3. Pointing out a flawed metaphor 4. Discrediting the ethos of opponent 5. Pointing out flawed statisti
Questionable Cause
Charisma
(Argument from) Testimony
Tools of Refutation
35. It does not follow - Red Herring belongs to this category
Personification
Epistrophe
Non Sequitur
Ad Hominem
36. 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
Questionable Analogy
Syllogism
Refutation Strategies
Litotes
37. 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'
Division
(Argument from) Cause
Sophist
Antithesis
38. Providing a response to each reason that an opponent gives
Syllogism
Direct Refutation
Exergasia
Personification
39. Grounds ---> Claim | Warrant
Correctio
Toulmin Model
Procedural (Stasis)
Parallelism
40. Are there associated commonplaces for this metaphor that can be turned against the arguer?
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Second
Litotes
Refutation Potential
41. Draws a conclusion about the PARTS of an ENTITY based on knowledge about the whole entity.
Division
Good Moral Character
Blame
Sound
42. Incorrectly assuming that one choice or another must be made when other choices are available or when no choice must be made
Hasty Generalization
False Dichotomy
Definitional (Stasis)
Enthymeme
43. Wrote 'On Not Being' and 'In Defense of Helen'
Metaphor
Example
Prolepsis
Gorgias
44. 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:
Refutation Potential
First
Parallelism
Blame
45. A legitimate generalization is applied to a particular case in an absolute manner
Ethos
(Fallacy of) Accident
Rhetoric
Toulmin Model
46. 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
Antithesis
Good Moral Character
Red Herring
Ambiguity
47. beginning repeated at ending
Division
Epanalepsis
Unsound
Rhetoric
48. The opposite of hyperbole - this is a deliberate understatement for effect.
Litotes
Commonplaces
Prolepsis
Exergasia
49. 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?
Locus of Quantity
Checking for Cause argement
Sign
Argument
50. All A are B - all C are B - therefore all A are C
Archetypal (Metaphor)
Invalid (Categorical Syllogism)
Procedural (Stasis)
Division