D265 - WGU - Critical Thinking - Reason and Evidence
PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Are statements that can be true or false
NON-PROPOSITONS - ANSW Are sentences that are not statements about matters of fact or fiction. They
do not make a claim that can be true or false.
SIMPLE PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Have no internal logic structure, meaning whether they are true or false
does not depend on whether a part of them is true or false. They are simply true or false on their own.
(Example: Harry Potter wears glasses. The sky is blue.)
COMPLEX PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Have internal logic structure, meaning they are composed of simple
propositions. Whether they are true or false depends on whether their parts are true or false. (Example:
The sky is blue, but it does not look blue to me right now. The cat ate the food, but he did not like it. The
GDP of Canada is either $3 trillion or $12 trillion.)
Words used to identify Independent Propositions - ANSW AND, OR, EITHER, BUT, IF, THEN.
CONCLUSION INDICATORS - ANSW THEREFORE, SO, IT FOLLOWS THAT, HENCE, THUS, ENTAILS THAT, WE
MAY CONCLUDE THAT, IMPLIES THAT, WHEREFORE, AND AS A RESULT.
PREMISE INDICATORS - ANSW BECAUSE, FOR, GIVEN THAT, AS, SINCE, AS INDICATED BY.
DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS - ANSW Arguments where the premises guarantee or necessitate the
conclusion.
-mathematical arguments, logical arguments, arguments from definition.
INDUCTION ARGUMENTS - ANSW Arguments where the premises make the conclusion probable.
-analogies, authority, causal inferences, extrapolations, etc.
, INFERENCE TO THE BEST EXPLANATION OR ABDUCTION - ANSW Arguments where the best available
explanation is chosen as the correct explanation.
FORMAL FALLACY - ANSW Concerns the structure of an argument
INFORMAL FALLACY - ANSW Concerns the informational content of an argument
A FORMAL FALLACY IS A TYPE OF - ANSW Bad Argument Structure
Which piece of information would be the most helpful to know in assessing the credibility of a news
story? - ANSW Whether the name of the author and the publication are identified
Which questions are most appropriate for evaluating the credibility of an information source? - ANSW
Who funded it? & Does it try to get you to distrust other sources?
While researching a topic on the internet, a student encounters two different websites, one of that looks
more official than the other and includes tables, charts, and statistics, while the other does not.
What is the line of reasoning this student should employ to determine which site is more credible? -
ANSW It is not feasible to determine which site is more credible from the information provided.
In which way should an information source be approached if it is stating that it is the only source of real
information and that other sources cannot be trusted? - ANSW Skeptically, because the source may lack
credibility.
PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY - ANSW The principle of charity suggests we should try to understand ideas
before criticizing them.
Which of the following are reasons for applying the principle of charity? - ANSW It is morally right to
give others the benefit of the doubt.
It allows for a clearer understanding of the issue.
PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Are statements that can be true or false
NON-PROPOSITONS - ANSW Are sentences that are not statements about matters of fact or fiction. They
do not make a claim that can be true or false.
SIMPLE PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Have no internal logic structure, meaning whether they are true or false
does not depend on whether a part of them is true or false. They are simply true or false on their own.
(Example: Harry Potter wears glasses. The sky is blue.)
COMPLEX PROPOSITIONS - ANSW Have internal logic structure, meaning they are composed of simple
propositions. Whether they are true or false depends on whether their parts are true or false. (Example:
The sky is blue, but it does not look blue to me right now. The cat ate the food, but he did not like it. The
GDP of Canada is either $3 trillion or $12 trillion.)
Words used to identify Independent Propositions - ANSW AND, OR, EITHER, BUT, IF, THEN.
CONCLUSION INDICATORS - ANSW THEREFORE, SO, IT FOLLOWS THAT, HENCE, THUS, ENTAILS THAT, WE
MAY CONCLUDE THAT, IMPLIES THAT, WHEREFORE, AND AS A RESULT.
PREMISE INDICATORS - ANSW BECAUSE, FOR, GIVEN THAT, AS, SINCE, AS INDICATED BY.
DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS - ANSW Arguments where the premises guarantee or necessitate the
conclusion.
-mathematical arguments, logical arguments, arguments from definition.
INDUCTION ARGUMENTS - ANSW Arguments where the premises make the conclusion probable.
-analogies, authority, causal inferences, extrapolations, etc.
, INFERENCE TO THE BEST EXPLANATION OR ABDUCTION - ANSW Arguments where the best available
explanation is chosen as the correct explanation.
FORMAL FALLACY - ANSW Concerns the structure of an argument
INFORMAL FALLACY - ANSW Concerns the informational content of an argument
A FORMAL FALLACY IS A TYPE OF - ANSW Bad Argument Structure
Which piece of information would be the most helpful to know in assessing the credibility of a news
story? - ANSW Whether the name of the author and the publication are identified
Which questions are most appropriate for evaluating the credibility of an information source? - ANSW
Who funded it? & Does it try to get you to distrust other sources?
While researching a topic on the internet, a student encounters two different websites, one of that looks
more official than the other and includes tables, charts, and statistics, while the other does not.
What is the line of reasoning this student should employ to determine which site is more credible? -
ANSW It is not feasible to determine which site is more credible from the information provided.
In which way should an information source be approached if it is stating that it is the only source of real
information and that other sources cannot be trusted? - ANSW Skeptically, because the source may lack
credibility.
PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY - ANSW The principle of charity suggests we should try to understand ideas
before criticizing them.
Which of the following are reasons for applying the principle of charity? - ANSW It is morally right to
give others the benefit of the doubt.
It allows for a clearer understanding of the issue.
