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. Does the argument effectively appeal to audience values and priorities? Does the argument accurately capture the values at play in this situation?
Ad Hominem
Attitudinal (inherency)
(Evaluation Criteria for) Value-Oriented Arguments
Tokenism
2. _____ thought that the most worthy study is one that advances the student's ability to speak and deliberate on affairs of the state.
Conceding Arguments
Blame
Isocrates
Burden of proof
3. The process of discrediting someone's argument by revealing weaknesses in it or presenting a counterargument
Refutation
Hasty Generalization
Agree on Commonality then refute
Charisma
4. Who developed the argument from general probability?
False Charge of Fallacy
(Argument by) Analogy
Corax
Euphimism
5. 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'
(Argument of ) General probability
(Special Topoi for) Science
Nonassociated (commonplaces)
Tu Quoque
6. Are the terms of the metaphor coherent - or does it tell a story or paint a picure that fails to make sense internally?
Ill
Categorical (Syllogism)
Consistency
(Fallacy of) Accident
7. Qualitative significance is part of what stock issue?
Ill
Locus of Quality
Hasty Generalization
Quantitative (significance)
8. Specific evidence or reason to support the claim (often introduced with the words 'because' or 'since')
Refutation Potential
Begging the Question
Ambiguity
Grounds (or data)
9. Shifting the buren of proof is a category of ____ __ _____
(Argument from) Sign
Checking for Analogy argument
Appeal to Ignorance
Term I/Term II
10. Agreeing to some of the arguments made by your opponents so that you can focus on others
Antithesis
Antithesis
(Argument from) Cause
Conceding Arguments
11. The system for classifying disassociated terms (visually)
Status
Blame
Value Hierarchies
Popular Democracy
12. Values what is at the core or essence of a group (or class) rather than what is at the margins
Tu Quoque
Culturetypal (Metaphor)
Anaphora
Locus of Essence
13. 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?
Checking for Cause argement
Cost
Mixed Metaphor
Narrative
14. An argument that either lacks validity - soundness or both.
Prolepsis
Unsound
Division
Hasty Generalization
15. If A then B A Therefore B
Modus Ponens
Presumption
Attitudinal (inherency)
Anaphora
16. 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.
Good Moral Character
Personification
Anaphora
Appeal to Authority
17. _____ rejected rhetoric as flattery - not truth - a 'knack' on par with 'cookery' and 'cosmetics'
Plato
Shifting the Burden of Proof
Rhetoric
Sign
18. If A then B B Therefore - A
Affirming the Consequent (INVALID)
Unequivocal
Cicero's Four Stasis Points
Epanalepsis
19. Deliberate exaggeration for effect; it is often accomplished via comparisons - similes - and metaphors.
Hyperbole
Stock Issues
Modus Ponens
Value Hierarchies
20. Special Topoi and Loci of the Preferable - what kind of args?
Checking for Narrative argument
Value-Oriented Arguments
Questionable Analogy
Litotes
21. Grounds ---> Claim | Warrant
Quantity Quality Essence Existent
Charisma
Toulmin Model
Prolepsis
22. All A are B - all C are B - therefore no A are C
Invalid (Categorical Syllogism)
Gorgias
Antithesis
Testimony
23. Bases inferences on what we know of how people act in a rational/predictable way - in order to determine the truth
Debate Resolutions
Division
(Argument of ) General probability
Commonplaces
24. Repetition of the opening clause or sentence at its ending.
Warrant
Epanalepsis
Cure
Associated Commonplaces
25. All A are B - all C are B - therefore all A are C
Invalid (Categorical Syllogism)
Unequivocal
Straw Person
Charisma
26. Use of a word or phrase that could have several meanings
Cause 9Arguing that something caused something else)
Questionable Analogy
Quantity Quality Essence Existent
Ambiguity
27. Honesty - Dedication - Courage (What part of Ethos)
Good Moral Character
Popular Democracy
Value Hierarchies
Hypothetical (Syllogism)
28. Term with lower (negative) value
Tu Quoque
Term I (Disassociation Pair)
Parallelism
Blame
29. 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:
Value Hierarchies
(Fallacy of) Accident
Blame
Cure
30. Affirming or denying a point strongly by asking it as a question; also called a 'rhetorical question'
Anaphora
Epistrophe
Hasty Generalization
Erotema
31. Concerns new policy being proposed that will remedy the ill outlined and the inherent factors.
Formal Logic
Cure
Plato
Anaphora
32. The list that builds
Incrementum
Locus of Quality
False Charge of Fallacy
Locus of Quantity
33. Asks - 'of what kind is it?' Involves a question of the quality of the act - whether it is good or bad.
Qualitative (Stasis)
Appeal to Ignorance
Commonplaces
Burden of proof
34. Is another variety of Hasty Generalization. It is when you reason from a sample that is not representative (typical) of the population from which it was drawn.
Unrepresentative Sample
Parallelism
Anaphora
Narrative
35. Drawing an analogical conclusion when the cases compared are not relevantly alike
Parallelism
Questionable Analogy
Slippery Slope (Fallacy)
Claim
36. Part of blame stock issue - the composition of the policy is flawed
Fallacies
Deductive Reasoning
Good Moral Character
Structural (inherency)
37. Are there associated commonplaces for this metaphor that can be turned against the arguer?
Agree on Commonality then refute
Emotionally Charged (Language)
Enthymeme
Refutation Potential
38. Demonstrating respect and care for the audience
Checking for Analogy argument
Good Will (Ethos)
Locus of Quantity
Popular Democracy
39. 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?
Tu Quoque
Plato
Checking for Example argument
Straw Person
40. A metaphor with a vehicle that draws upon a human experience that is universal
False Dichotomy
Claim
Non Sequitur
Archetypal (Metaphor)
41. What order do definitional and qualitative stasis usually fall into when put into an argument?
Exergasia
Rhetoric
Second
Tokenism
42. 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
Common Practice (Fallacy)
Begging the Question
Hasty Generalization
Analogy
43. Incorrectly assuming that what is true of the parts is true of the whole
Composition
Tisias
Checking for Analogy argument
Testimony
44. 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
Cicero's Four Stasis Points
Ill
Division
Parallelism
45. Ideas repeated
Straw Person
Tu Quoque
(Argument of ) General probability
Exergasia
46. If A then B Not B Therefore not A
Checking for Testimony argument
Correctio
Quantitative (significance)
Modus Tollens
47. Draws a conclusion about the PARTS of an ENTITY based on knowledge about the whole entity.
Epanalepsis
Analogy
Erotema
Division
48. 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
Sign
Decision Rules
Term I/Term II
Refutation Strategies
49. 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'
(Argument from) Cause
Less Valued Term/Higher Valued Term
Deductive Reasoning
Erotema
50. Associated words or ideas with a vehicle or tenor
Epanalepsis
Mercenary Scientists
Commonplaces
Good Moral Character