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. Incorrectly assuming that what is true of the whole is true of the parts






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






3. Affirming or denying a point strongly by asking it as a question; also called a 'rhetorical question'






4. Ending repeated






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






6. Accepting an argument that you should believe something is true just because the majority believes it is true.






7. Religious liberty - limited government - entrepreneurship - military strength - traditional institutions - property rights






8. Oppostite of Litotes






9. 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?






10. Qualitative significance is part of what stock issue?






11. 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'






12. Associated words or ideas with a vehicle or tenor






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






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






15. 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






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






17. Circular Reasoning






18. Beginning repeated






19. An argument with true premises and valid form






20. Is a variety of questionable cause; it is when you conclude that something cause dsomething else just because the second thing came after it; literally translated as 'after this - therefore on account of this'






21. Ask a rhetorical question






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






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






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






25. The inference says that one thing is a sign of another. It's usually used in an argument that something IS. The warrant to this argument is usually in the form 'X is a sign of Y'






26. 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






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






28. 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






29. 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






30. 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'






31. 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'






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






33. Exaggeration






34. Is the source qualified to say what is being said? Is she or he in a position to know this information? Does the testimony represent what the authority really meant to say? Is the source relatively unbiased and recent?






35. Value Hierarchy Visualization






36. An argument that either lacks validity - soundness or both.






37. Drawing an analogical conclusion when the cases compared are not relevantly alike






38. Appeals from the character of the speaker






39. The list that builds






40. 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:






41. Misrepresenting an opponent's position as more extreme than it really is and then attacking that version - or attacking a weaker opponent while ignoring a stronger one.






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






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






44. 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'






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






46. Term with higher (positive) value






47. All A are B - all C are B - therefore no A are C






48. Uses emotional appeal instead of evidence to argue






49. If A then B Not B Therefore not A






50. 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