Page | 1
WGU C168 CRITICAL THINKING
QUESTIONS WITH DETAILED VERIFIED
ANSWERS
Fallacies of Presumption Ans: Complex question
Begging the question
Suppressed evidence
False Dichotomy - More choices are possible.
Fallacies of Relavance Ans: Appeal to emotion
Red Herring
Straw Person - distorted argument
Argument against a person -
Indirect
Abusive
Circumstantial
Tu Quoque(you too)
Fallacies of Ambiguity Ans: Amphiboly - word has more than one
meaning.
Equivocation - change of meaning in the argument.
Division - Whole does not equal parts.
Composition - Parts do not equal whole.
, Page | 2
The facts available to support a conclusion. Ans: Evidence
Statements based on factual research that are subject to forms of
verification, but do not require critical thought. Ans: Objective
statements
The statement in an argument that we claim is implied by the argument's
premises. Ans: Conclusion
A set of statements containing at least one premise and a conclusion.
Ans: Argument
A logical and systematic approach to thinking about something. Ans:
Reasoning
A method of approaching a problem or decision that entails
systematically evaluating arguments and reasoning. Ans: Critical
thinking
The act of examining one's thoughts, feelings and motives. Ans: Self-
reflection
A process performed according to a plan; Methodical. Ans: Systematic
The set of accepted assumptions upon which an argument is built. Ans:
Premises
An argument that is based on poor reasoning. Ans: Fallacy
A grammatical unit composed of words that form a complete thought.
Ans: Sentence
An argument whose conclusion follows conclusively from its premises.
This depends on the argument's form. Ans: Valid
A set of statements that do not contain supporting statements, and
therefore they do not express reasoning. Ans: Non-arguments
A word that can signal whether a sentence is a premise or a conclusion.
Ans: Inference indicator
WGU C168 CRITICAL THINKING
QUESTIONS WITH DETAILED VERIFIED
ANSWERS
Fallacies of Presumption Ans: Complex question
Begging the question
Suppressed evidence
False Dichotomy - More choices are possible.
Fallacies of Relavance Ans: Appeal to emotion
Red Herring
Straw Person - distorted argument
Argument against a person -
Indirect
Abusive
Circumstantial
Tu Quoque(you too)
Fallacies of Ambiguity Ans: Amphiboly - word has more than one
meaning.
Equivocation - change of meaning in the argument.
Division - Whole does not equal parts.
Composition - Parts do not equal whole.
, Page | 2
The facts available to support a conclusion. Ans: Evidence
Statements based on factual research that are subject to forms of
verification, but do not require critical thought. Ans: Objective
statements
The statement in an argument that we claim is implied by the argument's
premises. Ans: Conclusion
A set of statements containing at least one premise and a conclusion.
Ans: Argument
A logical and systematic approach to thinking about something. Ans:
Reasoning
A method of approaching a problem or decision that entails
systematically evaluating arguments and reasoning. Ans: Critical
thinking
The act of examining one's thoughts, feelings and motives. Ans: Self-
reflection
A process performed according to a plan; Methodical. Ans: Systematic
The set of accepted assumptions upon which an argument is built. Ans:
Premises
An argument that is based on poor reasoning. Ans: Fallacy
A grammatical unit composed of words that form a complete thought.
Ans: Sentence
An argument whose conclusion follows conclusively from its premises.
This depends on the argument's form. Ans: Valid
A set of statements that do not contain supporting statements, and
therefore they do not express reasoning. Ans: Non-arguments
A word that can signal whether a sentence is a premise or a conclusion.
Ans: Inference indicator
