PHI 105 TOPIC 6 QUIZ ON TYPES OF
COMMUNICATION ACTUAL QUESTIONS AND
VERIFIED ANSWERS EXAM PREP
◉ APPEAL TO IGNORANCE. Answer: An appeal to ignorance uses
lack of evidence (for or against) as the basis of the argument. For
example, if something can't be disproven, it must be true!
Example
You have a family member who has a terminal disease. You hear of a
possible new cure being offered in another country. You contact the
group promoting this cure and ask if it works. They say, "No one has
ever shown that it doesn't work, so of course it works!"
◉ HASTY GENERALIZATION. Answer: Definition
A hasty generalization occurs 'when a conclusion is drawn from a
sample that is too small or selective to assume with any confidence
that it represents the subject accurately' (Goodpaster & Kirby, 2006, p.
205).
◉ POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC. Answer: Definition
, Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc at times is one of the most persuasive
fallacies. Assuming that because B follows A, A must have caused B.
This is an easy fallacy to assume because this could happen, but we
cannot always assume this happens. Some things just happen due to
coincidence and the two things really having nothing to do with each
other.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc can also be the source of superstitious
thinking. Think about an athlete who wears his 'lucky' socks and the
team wins the game, you might conclude that wearing 'lucky' socks
leads to winning. Maybe you break a mirror and then soon after you
get into an accident, you might conclude that breaking the mirror led
to that misfortune. These occurrences are merely coincidental and are
not the reason for one's misfortune.
◉ APPEAL TO AUTHORITY. Answer: An Appeal to Authority is a
fallacy with the following form:
Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Therefore, C is true (Nizkor, 2013).
In the video above, we see a young man proceed with a lawsuit based
on the advice of his doctor even though the doctor has no legal
background whatsoever. This erroneous acceptance is based on the
belief that the person is the expert or authoritative so therefore
everything they say must be true. In this case, the doctor was not
qualified to make a claim about the legality of the car cash, so his
reasoning was fallacious.
◉ SLIPPERY SLOPE. Answer: Definition
COMMUNICATION ACTUAL QUESTIONS AND
VERIFIED ANSWERS EXAM PREP
◉ APPEAL TO IGNORANCE. Answer: An appeal to ignorance uses
lack of evidence (for or against) as the basis of the argument. For
example, if something can't be disproven, it must be true!
Example
You have a family member who has a terminal disease. You hear of a
possible new cure being offered in another country. You contact the
group promoting this cure and ask if it works. They say, "No one has
ever shown that it doesn't work, so of course it works!"
◉ HASTY GENERALIZATION. Answer: Definition
A hasty generalization occurs 'when a conclusion is drawn from a
sample that is too small or selective to assume with any confidence
that it represents the subject accurately' (Goodpaster & Kirby, 2006, p.
205).
◉ POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC. Answer: Definition
, Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc at times is one of the most persuasive
fallacies. Assuming that because B follows A, A must have caused B.
This is an easy fallacy to assume because this could happen, but we
cannot always assume this happens. Some things just happen due to
coincidence and the two things really having nothing to do with each
other.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc can also be the source of superstitious
thinking. Think about an athlete who wears his 'lucky' socks and the
team wins the game, you might conclude that wearing 'lucky' socks
leads to winning. Maybe you break a mirror and then soon after you
get into an accident, you might conclude that breaking the mirror led
to that misfortune. These occurrences are merely coincidental and are
not the reason for one's misfortune.
◉ APPEAL TO AUTHORITY. Answer: An Appeal to Authority is a
fallacy with the following form:
Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Therefore, C is true (Nizkor, 2013).
In the video above, we see a young man proceed with a lawsuit based
on the advice of his doctor even though the doctor has no legal
background whatsoever. This erroneous acceptance is based on the
belief that the person is the expert or authoritative so therefore
everything they say must be true. In this case, the doctor was not
qualified to make a claim about the legality of the car cash, so his
reasoning was fallacious.
◉ SLIPPERY SLOPE. Answer: Definition
