Question Database: Critical Thinking
Argument analysis
Is the following argument in standard form?
1. If global warming was really happening, satellite measurements of the Earth’s atmosphere taken over the last ten years would show an increase in temperature.
2. They show no such increase.
Therefore:
C. Global warming is a myth.
A. Yes, this argument is in standard form.
B. No, the argument is not in standard form.
Answer: B
Topic:
standard form
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Premise 2 should be spelt out in full and the conclusion should match the antecedent of premise 1.
1. If global warming was really happening, satellite measurements of the Earth’s atmosphere taken over the last ten years would show an increase in temperature.
2. [They show no such increase.]
Therefore:
C. Global warming is not really happening.
Which of the following would be the best way of representing the second premise in standard form?
A. Satellite measurements of the Earth’s atmosphere taken over the last ten years show no such increase.
B. Satellite measurements of the Earth’s atmosphere taken over the last ten years do not show an increase in temperature.
C. They show no such increase in temperature.
D. Satellite measurements of the Earth’s atmosphere show no increase in temperature.
Answer: B
Topic:
standard form
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Bill should quit smoking because people who smoke get lung cancer.
What is the best interpretation of the premise?
A. Most people who smoke get lung cancer.
B. Everyone who smokes gets lung cancer.
C. Some people who some sometimes get lung cancer.
D. People who smoke are more likely to get lung cancer than people who don't smoke.
Answer: D
Topic:
Principle of charity
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Identify the structure of the following argument:
If homeopathic pills are too dilute to have any effect, they can't really help the many people who use them. Since tests have shown that they really do work in many cases, they can't be too weak.
A. One premise supporting a conclusion.
B. Two co-dependent premises supporting a conclusion.
C. Two independent premises supporting a conclusion.
D. Two conclusions following from two co-dependent premises.
Answer: B
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
2006: Mostly B, some D
Identify the structure of the following argument:
Building construction increases only when people are confident that the economy is doing well. Therefore, since people are now confident in the economy, we can expect building construction to increase.
A. One premise supporting a conclusion.
B. Two co-dependent premises supporting a conclusion.
C. Two independent premises supporting a conclusion.
D. Three co-dependent premises supporting a conclusion.
Answer: B
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
2006: 99% B
The speed limit should be reduced to 40km in city centres. This would reduce the amount of pollution in the cities and make the streets safer for children and pedestrians.
A. One premise supporting a conclusion.
B. Two co-dependent premises supporting a conclusion.
C. Two independent premises supporting a conclusion.
D. Two independent premises supporting two conclusions.
Answer: C
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
1. Reducing the speed limit to 40km/h in city centres would reduce the amount of pollution in the cities.
2. Reducing the speed limit to 40km/h in the city centres would make the streets safer for children and pedestrians.
Therefore:
C. The speed limit should be reduced to 40km/h in city centres.
Which of the following maps correctly represents the structure of this argument?
A.
B.
C.
D.
Answer: D
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Alternative version
1. Reducing the speed limit to 40km/h in city centres would reduce the amount of pollution in the cities.
2. Reducing the speed limit to 40km/h in the city centres would make the streets safer for children and pedestrians.
Therefore:
C. The speed limit should be reduced to 40km/h in city centres.
What, if anything, is wrong with the diagram of the given argument?
A. It incorrectly shows premises which provide independent support for the conclusion as co-dependent premises.
B. It incorrectly shows co-dependent premises as providing independent support for the conclusion.
C. There is nothing wrong with the diagram.
D. Reducing the speed limit to 40 km /h would cause terrible congestion.
Answer: A
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
2006: All correct
Speed cameras may actually cause more accidents than they prevent. They can cause sudden breaking as drivers slow down to the posted speed limit and distract the driver’s attention as they look out for the next camera rather than at the road ahead. What’s more, lower speeds demand and promote lower attention levels from drivers.
Which of the following maps correctly represents the structure of this argument?
A.
B.
C.
D.
Answer: C
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Alternative version:
1. Speed cameras distract the driver's attention as drivers look out for the next camera rather than the road ahead.
2. Speed cameras cause sudden braking as drivers slow down to the posted speed limit.
3. Lower speeds demand and promote lower attention levels.
Therefore:
C. Speed cameras may actually cause more accidents.
What, if anything, is wrong with the diagram of the given argument?
A. It incorrectly shows premises which provide independent support for the conclusion as co-dependent premises.
B. It incorrectly shows co-dependent premises as providing independent support for the conclusion.
C. There is nothing wrong with the diagram.
D. The reasons given for the conclusion are highly questionable and no evidence is presented to support them.
Answer: C
Topic:
Co-dependent and independent premises
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Mostly C, a few Bs.
Lawyer: For a person to be found guilty of murder, it must be shown that their actions caused the death of another person. But although Hallett beat Smith unconscious, he is not guilty of murder because he did not cause Smith’s death. Smith was alive when Hallett left and died later of drowning when the tide came in.
Which one of the following best represents the conclusion of this argument?
A. Smith was alive when Hallett left and died later of drowning when the tide came in.
B. Hallett is not guilty of murder.
C. Hallett is not guilty of murdering Smith.
D. For Hallett to be found guilty of murder, it must be shown that he caused Smith’s death.
Answer: D
Topic:
Argument analysis
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
1. For a person to be guilty of murdering someone, their actions must have caused the death of that person.
2. ____________________
Therefore:
C. Hallett is not guilty of murdering Smith.
Which of the following best fits the gap at premise 2?
A. Smith died later of drowning when the tide came in.
B. Hallett did not cause Smith’s death.
C. Hallett beat Smith unconscious.
D. Smith was alive when Hallett left.
Answer: B
Topic:
Argument analysis
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
1. For a person to be guilty of murdering someone, their actions must have caused the death of that person.
2. Hallett did not cause Smith’s death.
Therefore:
C. Hallett is not guilty of murdering Smith.
Which of the following maps of the argument is correct?
A.
B.
C.
D.
Answer: C
Topic:
Argument analysis
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Lawyer: For a person to be found guilty of murder, it must be shown that their actions caused the death of another person. But although Hallett beat Smith unconscious, he is not guilty of murder because he did not cause Smith’s death. Smith was alive when Hallett left and died later of drowning when the tide came in.
1. For a person to be guilty of murdering someone, their actions must have caused the death of that person.
2. Hallett did not cause Smith’s death.
Therefore:
C. Hallett is not guilty of murdering Smith.
How does this additional premise (highlighted in the text) fit into the argument?
A.
B.
C.
D.
Answer: D
Topic:
Argument analysis
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.
Notes:
Next year there will be a shortfall in the Arts faculty budget of 2.5 million dollars. Since there is no way to increase the amount of money in the budget, our only choice is to cut the amount we spend. The plan before you outlines staffing cuts that would produce savings of 2.5 million dollars next year. Therefore, we should adopt this plan.
Which one of the following diagrams represents the structure of this argument?
A.
B.
C.
D.
Answer: D
Topic:
Argument analysis
Course Level:
First year, critical thinking.