PSY 304 week 4 Quiz – Arizona State University.

PSY 304 week 4 Quiz – Arizona State University. Question 1 2 out of 2 points Consider this argument: "When Caitlin was six years old she told her Mom that in school she wanted to learn how come babies grew up to look like their parents. The science that deals with that is genetics. Therefore, when she was a little girl Caitlin had already announced that she planned to major in genetics." That argument is an example of __________. Selected Answer: the fallacy of false reference Answers: the fallacy of false classification the fallacy of division the fallacy of false reference a valid argument Question 2 2 out of 2 points Consider this argument: "Racists typically like to hang out with racists. Birds of a feather, if you know what I mean. And yesterday I saw John hanging out with those racist White National Pride jerks. So you know what that makes John, don't you. Right. A racist." That argument is an example of __________. Selected Answer: the fallacy of false classification Answers: the fallacy of false classification the fallacy of division the fallacy of false reference a valid argument Question 3 2 out of 2 points One important distinguishing feature of valid arguments is that __________. Selected Answer: if the conclusion is false, then one or more of the premises must also have been false Answers: if the premises are true then the conclusion must be false if the conclusion is false, then one or more of the premises must also have been false they are shorter than invalid arguments they reveal new and important information about natural phenomena Question 4 2 out of 2 points Consider this argument: "If Pepsi tasted better than Coke, then it would outsell Coke. But Pepsi does not taste better than Coke. So it will not outsell Coke." That argument is an example of __________. Selected Answer: the fallacy of denying the antecedent Answers: the fallacy of denying the antecedent the fallacy of affirming the consequent a valid argument by affirming the antecedent a valid argument by denying the consequent