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






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






3. Deliberate correction






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






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






6. 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






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






8. Oppostite of Litotes






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






10. 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'






11. Opposite of Hyperbole






12. 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?






13. Understatement






14. Ending repeated






15. Values more over less in terms of quantitative outcomes (the greatest good for the greatest number)






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






17. If A then B Not B Therefore not A






18. 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






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






20. Knowledge - Experience - Prudence (What part of Ethos)






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






22. Wrote 'On Not Being' and 'In Defense of Helen'






23. A _____ is not just abuse or contradiction






24. Is a variation of Appeal to Ignorance. It is when you accept an argument that the presumption lies with one side and the other side has the burden of proving its case when the reverse is actually true






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






26. '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?






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






28. Arguing that the conclusion of an argument must be untrue because there is a fallacy in the reasoning. (Just because the premises may not be true - does not mean that the conclusion has to be false)






29. The list that builds






30. Are there associated commonplaces for this metaphor that can be turned against the arguer?






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






32. Ammending a term or phrase you have just read






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






34. 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.






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






36. A metaphor that gives attributes to a nonhuman thing






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






38. 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






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






40. 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






41. Who developed the argument from general probability?






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






43. Draws a conclusion about an entire entity based on knowledge about all of its parts






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






45. Qualitative significance is part of what stock issue?






46. 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






47. 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?






48. Concerns new policy being proposed that will remedy the ill outlined and the inherent factors.






49. 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'






50. 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'