WGU D265 CRITICAL THINKING
CERTIFICATION SCRIPT 2026 QUESTIONS
WITH SOLUTIONS GRADED A+
◍ Irrelevant Appeals.
Answer: The premises aren't relevant to the truth or falsity of the conclusion
because whether or not the conclusion is true doesn't depend at all on
whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Mapping Independent Support.
Answer: Without the other conjoint premises, it would be unclear why one
conjoint premise should be taken as a reason for accepting the conclusion.
◍ Irrelevant Appeals.
Answer: Any kind of appeal to a factor, consideration, or reason that isn't
relevant to the argument at hand (but is used as a reason rather than as a
mere distraction—A Red Herring is a distraction, not an irrelevant reason) is
called an Irrelevant Appeal. The premises aren't relevant to the truth or
falsity of the conclusion because whether or not the conclusion is true
doesn't depend at all on whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Fallacy of Appeal to Ignorance.
Answer: The fallacies of weak induction are all failures in reasoning about
the messy world of cause and effect, contingent facts of the universe, and
generalizations about kinds of things in the world. In each case, an argument
is put forth using evidence incorrectly, or making bad predictions, or
generalizing improperly. Clearly, this kind of argument cannot provide a
justification for its conclusion. In other words, there are all sorts of (sort of)
surprising facts about the pyramids, and nobody knows how to explain them
◍ Critical thinking.
, Answer: primarily the ability to think carefully about thinking and
reasoning—to criticize your own reasoning. "Criticize" here is not meant in
the sense of being mean or talking down or making fun of. Instead, it is used
in the sense of, for example, how a coach might take a critical stance toward
a players' skills—he throws high every time, she does not lead with her foot,
they ride too forward in the saddle, etc. "Critical" here means something
more like "reflective," "careful," or "attentive to potential errors."
◍ Principle of Clarity.
Answer: interpreting the argument to be as plausible as possible.
◍ Prototype.
Answer: help us understand what is going on right in front of us.
◍ Irrevelant Appeals.
Answer: The premises aren't relevant to the truth or falsity of the conclusion
because whether or not the conclusion is true doesn't depend at all on
whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Complex propositions.
Answer: have internal logical structure, meaning they are composed of
simple propositions. Whether they are true or false depends on whether their
parts are true or false.
◍ strong inductive argument.
Answer: is a form of reasoning that attempts to demonstrate the conclusion
of an argument (the claim the argument is meant to support) is probably
true, given the truth of the argument's premises (the claims made in support
of the conclusion).
◍ Confirmation bias.
Answer: ignore evidence that undermines what is already believed and put
extra weight on evidence that confirms what is already believed.
◍ Validity.
Answer: is a property of an argument structure. It means this structure is
such that if the premises of any argument with this structure are true then the
, conclusion of the argument must be true.
◍ Evasive.
Answer: An example of red herring. Evasive refers to responding to a
question with an answer irrelevant to the original question.
◍ Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc | False Cause Fallacy.
Answer: Just because something regularly follows another thing, doesn't
mean that it is caused by that other thing. As the saying goes, correlation
does not imply causation.The False Cause fallacy happens when someone
mistakes correlation for causation.
◍ Fallacy of Equivocation.
Answer: Equivocation can only be identified by understanding the meanings
of the words involved. In fact, the definition of the fallacy of equivocation
refers to this very fact: the same word is being used in two different senses
(i.e., with two different meanings). S
◍ Bad inferential structure:.
Answer: Every argument with the same structure as this argument is bad
(invalid or weak). The premises do not, in fact, demonstrate or maybe even
support the conclusion. In other words, we can accept the premises as true
without being compelled to accept the conclusion. There is something
wrong with this argument's general structure.
◍ independent support.
Answer: when each premise seems like it's an argument for the conclusion
on its own.
◍ Sharpshooter fallacy.
Answer: someone already knows which conclusion they'd like to prove and
then selects evidence which supports that conclusion.
◍ Potential Impacts.
Answer: While the primary consequence to avoid in each form of bias is the
forming of false beliefs, different forms of bias can cause negative
consequences in different ways and thus require different responses and
CERTIFICATION SCRIPT 2026 QUESTIONS
WITH SOLUTIONS GRADED A+
◍ Irrelevant Appeals.
Answer: The premises aren't relevant to the truth or falsity of the conclusion
because whether or not the conclusion is true doesn't depend at all on
whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Mapping Independent Support.
Answer: Without the other conjoint premises, it would be unclear why one
conjoint premise should be taken as a reason for accepting the conclusion.
◍ Irrelevant Appeals.
Answer: Any kind of appeal to a factor, consideration, or reason that isn't
relevant to the argument at hand (but is used as a reason rather than as a
mere distraction—A Red Herring is a distraction, not an irrelevant reason) is
called an Irrelevant Appeal. The premises aren't relevant to the truth or
falsity of the conclusion because whether or not the conclusion is true
doesn't depend at all on whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Fallacy of Appeal to Ignorance.
Answer: The fallacies of weak induction are all failures in reasoning about
the messy world of cause and effect, contingent facts of the universe, and
generalizations about kinds of things in the world. In each case, an argument
is put forth using evidence incorrectly, or making bad predictions, or
generalizing improperly. Clearly, this kind of argument cannot provide a
justification for its conclusion. In other words, there are all sorts of (sort of)
surprising facts about the pyramids, and nobody knows how to explain them
◍ Critical thinking.
, Answer: primarily the ability to think carefully about thinking and
reasoning—to criticize your own reasoning. "Criticize" here is not meant in
the sense of being mean or talking down or making fun of. Instead, it is used
in the sense of, for example, how a coach might take a critical stance toward
a players' skills—he throws high every time, she does not lead with her foot,
they ride too forward in the saddle, etc. "Critical" here means something
more like "reflective," "careful," or "attentive to potential errors."
◍ Principle of Clarity.
Answer: interpreting the argument to be as plausible as possible.
◍ Prototype.
Answer: help us understand what is going on right in front of us.
◍ Irrevelant Appeals.
Answer: The premises aren't relevant to the truth or falsity of the conclusion
because whether or not the conclusion is true doesn't depend at all on
whether or not the premises are true.
◍ Complex propositions.
Answer: have internal logical structure, meaning they are composed of
simple propositions. Whether they are true or false depends on whether their
parts are true or false.
◍ strong inductive argument.
Answer: is a form of reasoning that attempts to demonstrate the conclusion
of an argument (the claim the argument is meant to support) is probably
true, given the truth of the argument's premises (the claims made in support
of the conclusion).
◍ Confirmation bias.
Answer: ignore evidence that undermines what is already believed and put
extra weight on evidence that confirms what is already believed.
◍ Validity.
Answer: is a property of an argument structure. It means this structure is
such that if the premises of any argument with this structure are true then the
, conclusion of the argument must be true.
◍ Evasive.
Answer: An example of red herring. Evasive refers to responding to a
question with an answer irrelevant to the original question.
◍ Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc | False Cause Fallacy.
Answer: Just because something regularly follows another thing, doesn't
mean that it is caused by that other thing. As the saying goes, correlation
does not imply causation.The False Cause fallacy happens when someone
mistakes correlation for causation.
◍ Fallacy of Equivocation.
Answer: Equivocation can only be identified by understanding the meanings
of the words involved. In fact, the definition of the fallacy of equivocation
refers to this very fact: the same word is being used in two different senses
(i.e., with two different meanings). S
◍ Bad inferential structure:.
Answer: Every argument with the same structure as this argument is bad
(invalid or weak). The premises do not, in fact, demonstrate or maybe even
support the conclusion. In other words, we can accept the premises as true
without being compelled to accept the conclusion. There is something
wrong with this argument's general structure.
◍ independent support.
Answer: when each premise seems like it's an argument for the conclusion
on its own.
◍ Sharpshooter fallacy.
Answer: someone already knows which conclusion they'd like to prove and
then selects evidence which supports that conclusion.
◍ Potential Impacts.
Answer: While the primary consequence to avoid in each form of bias is the
forming of false beliefs, different forms of bias can cause negative
consequences in different ways and thus require different responses and
