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. _____ rejected rhetoric as flattery - not truth - a 'knack' on par with 'cookery' and 'cosmetics'






2. 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?






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






4. The process of using logic to draw conclusions from given facts - definitions - and properties






5. Draws a conclusions about ONE MEMBER of a GROUP based on a general rule about all members






6. A _____ is not just abuse or contradiction






7. If A then B Not B Therefore not A






8. Involves a large number of people; from Ill stock issue - Produces a large amount of harm; from Ill stock issue






9. 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?






10. Does the moral really follow from the story? Is the narrative plausible and coherent? Are the characterizations consistent?






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






12. Accepting an argument by example that reasons from specific to general on the basis of relevant but insufficient information or evidence.






13. Did not pay Corax for sophistry lessons and was taken to court






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






15. 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'






16. A metaphor with a vehicle that draws upon experience that is specific to a particular culture






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






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






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






20. Anticipatory refutation - in which you preempt an opposition argument before it is even offered.






21. 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?






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






23. 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.






24. Asks - 'who has the authority?' Involves a question of proper procedure.






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






26. Obligation of the arguer advocating change to overcome the presumption through argument






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






28. Uses emotional appeal instead of evidence to argue






29. Opposite of anadiplosis






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






31. 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'






32. 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.






33. 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






34. After this - therefore on account of this






35. Special Topoi and Loci of the Preferable - what kind of args?






36. Relative advantages and disadvantages of the new policy. Are the adverse effects going to outweigh the benefits?






37. Specific evidence or reason to support the claim (often introduced with the words 'because' or 'since')






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






39. Beginning repeated






40. Repetition of the same idea - changing either its words - its delivery - or the general treatment it is given.






41. Professional Standing - Fame (Ethos)






42. Originality - explanatory power - quantitative precision - simplicity - scope






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






44. 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






45. Does the argument effectively appeal to audience values and priorities? Does the argument accurately capture the values at play in this situation?






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






47. This is the name for fallacies that do not have another name but that involve a claim that does not follow from the premises (e.g. the evidence is not relevant or not appropriate to support the claim). Litterally translated as 'it does not follow -'






48. 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






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






50. beginning repeated at ending