PHIL 347 Exam 2: Critical Reasoning - Updated and Latest
Questions and Correct Answers with Rationale
1. Which of the following conditions must be met for a deductive argument to be considered sound?
A. The argument must be strong and the premises must be probably true.
B. The argument must be valid and all of its premises must be actually true.
C. The conclusion must be true regardless of the validity of the premises.
D. The argument must use emotional language to persuade the audience effectively.
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Soundness is a specific property of deductive arguments that requires both logical validity
and factual truth. An argument is valid if the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises, assuming
they are true. For an argument to be sound, the premises must actually correspond to reality. If even one
premise is false, the argument is considered unsound despite its logical structure. Therefore, soundness
represents the highest standard of deductive proof in critical reasoning.
2. In inductive reasoning, what term describes a strong argument that also contains true premises?
A. Valid
B. Cogent
C. Sound
D. Categorical
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Cogency is the inductive equivalent of soundness in deductive logic. A cogent argument must
first be inductively strong, meaning the premises make the conclusion highly probable. Additionally, all
the premises provided in the argument must be factually true in the real world. If an inductive argument
,is weak or contains a false premise, it is considered uncogent. This distinction helps evaluators determine
the reliability of probabilistic claims.
3. Identify the fallacy: ‘You shouldn’t believe what Professor Smith says about tax reform; he was once
arrested for a DUI.’
A. Straw Man
B. Ad Hominem (Abusive)
C. Appeal to Ignorance
D. Red Herring
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: The Ad Hominem fallacy occurs when someone attacks the character of the person making an
argument rather than the argument itself. In this case, Professor Smith’s past legal issues are irrelevant to
the validity of his views on tax reform. Attacking his personal history serves as a distraction from the
actual economic debate. Critical thinkers must separate the source of the claim from the evidence
supporting the claim. This ensures that arguments are judged on their own logical merits.
4. What is the logical form of the following argument? ‘If it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground is not
wet. Therefore, it did not rain.’
A. Modus Tollens
B. Affirming the Consequent
C. Modus Ponens
D. Denying the Antecedent
Correct Answer: A
, Rationale: Modus Tollens is a valid deductive form known as ‘denying the consequent.’ The structure
follows the pattern: If P, then Q; Not Q; Therefore, Not P. In the example provided, the absence of the
effect (wet ground) implies the absence of the cause (rain). This form of reasoning is always logically
valid because the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Understanding these
patterns is essential for formal logical analysis.
5. Which fallacy is committed when an opponent’s position is misrepresented to make it easier to attack?
A. Straw Man
B. Slippery Slope
C. False Dilemma
D. Hasty Generalization
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: The Straw Man fallacy involves distorting or oversimplifying a person’s argument to make it
vulnerable to criticism. By creating a ‘straw’ version of the original point, the attacker avoids dealing with
the actual complexities of the issue. This tactic is deceptive because it gives the appearance of a successful
rebuttal while ignoring the real argument. Critical reasoning requires engaging with the strongest version
of an opponent’s position. This ensures a fair and intellectually honest evaluation of the facts.
6. An argument is ‘valid’ if and only if:
A. It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
B. The conclusion is definitely true in reality.
C. The premises are all true.
D. The majority of people agree with the conclusion.
Correct Answer: A
Questions and Correct Answers with Rationale
1. Which of the following conditions must be met for a deductive argument to be considered sound?
A. The argument must be strong and the premises must be probably true.
B. The argument must be valid and all of its premises must be actually true.
C. The conclusion must be true regardless of the validity of the premises.
D. The argument must use emotional language to persuade the audience effectively.
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Soundness is a specific property of deductive arguments that requires both logical validity
and factual truth. An argument is valid if the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises, assuming
they are true. For an argument to be sound, the premises must actually correspond to reality. If even one
premise is false, the argument is considered unsound despite its logical structure. Therefore, soundness
represents the highest standard of deductive proof in critical reasoning.
2. In inductive reasoning, what term describes a strong argument that also contains true premises?
A. Valid
B. Cogent
C. Sound
D. Categorical
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Cogency is the inductive equivalent of soundness in deductive logic. A cogent argument must
first be inductively strong, meaning the premises make the conclusion highly probable. Additionally, all
the premises provided in the argument must be factually true in the real world. If an inductive argument
,is weak or contains a false premise, it is considered uncogent. This distinction helps evaluators determine
the reliability of probabilistic claims.
3. Identify the fallacy: ‘You shouldn’t believe what Professor Smith says about tax reform; he was once
arrested for a DUI.’
A. Straw Man
B. Ad Hominem (Abusive)
C. Appeal to Ignorance
D. Red Herring
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: The Ad Hominem fallacy occurs when someone attacks the character of the person making an
argument rather than the argument itself. In this case, Professor Smith’s past legal issues are irrelevant to
the validity of his views on tax reform. Attacking his personal history serves as a distraction from the
actual economic debate. Critical thinkers must separate the source of the claim from the evidence
supporting the claim. This ensures that arguments are judged on their own logical merits.
4. What is the logical form of the following argument? ‘If it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground is not
wet. Therefore, it did not rain.’
A. Modus Tollens
B. Affirming the Consequent
C. Modus Ponens
D. Denying the Antecedent
Correct Answer: A
, Rationale: Modus Tollens is a valid deductive form known as ‘denying the consequent.’ The structure
follows the pattern: If P, then Q; Not Q; Therefore, Not P. In the example provided, the absence of the
effect (wet ground) implies the absence of the cause (rain). This form of reasoning is always logically
valid because the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Understanding these
patterns is essential for formal logical analysis.
5. Which fallacy is committed when an opponent’s position is misrepresented to make it easier to attack?
A. Straw Man
B. Slippery Slope
C. False Dilemma
D. Hasty Generalization
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: The Straw Man fallacy involves distorting or oversimplifying a person’s argument to make it
vulnerable to criticism. By creating a ‘straw’ version of the original point, the attacker avoids dealing with
the actual complexities of the issue. This tactic is deceptive because it gives the appearance of a successful
rebuttal while ignoring the real argument. Critical reasoning requires engaging with the strongest version
of an opponent’s position. This ensures a fair and intellectually honest evaluation of the facts.
6. An argument is ‘valid’ if and only if:
A. It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
B. The conclusion is definitely true in reality.
C. The premises are all true.
D. The majority of people agree with the conclusion.
Correct Answer: A
