PHIL 347N Week 4, 2024-2025Checkpoint Quiz
Seventy-three percent of the people surveyed said that they wanted universal health care
coverage. Fifty-four percent said that they were worried about the cost of the program or the
quality of the care that would be provided. Therefore, the American people are opposed to
the President's health care reform legislation. Using the 4 tests for evaluating arguments,
evaluate the worthiness of the example. Remember, if the argument fails a test, you do not
need to go further. Give a detailed explanation in support of your evaluation. If the argument
contains a fallacy, explain what you think the fallacy is.
Truthfulness of the premises - we must assume that the data collected by the speaker is true,
therefore it passes the test
Logical strength - The conclusion states that the American people are opposed to the
President's healthcare reform. However, 73% of the people surveyed said that they did want the
universal health care coverage which is more than the 54% who said they were worried about
it. Therefore it is not logical for the speaker to conclude that American's are against the reform.
The argument fails this test. I believe the argument contains the hasty generalization fallacy.
There is too little information to conclude that American's are against health care reform.
But if we don't study together, then I'm not going to get through the course. And if I don't get
through the course, then I'm going to ruin my GPA and lose my financial aid. So if we don't
study together tonight, then I'm going to lose my financial aid. What test does this argument
fail? What fallacy does the argument contain?
The argument fails the test of logical strength. It is not logical to assume that by not studying
together tonight, the student will lose his financial aid. There are many other factors that could
play into the loss of financial aid. The arguments contains the slippery slope fallacy which entails
falsely linking events, generally to a bad or poor result.
1. What are the three fundamental reasoning strategies listed in the text?
a. Comparative reasoning
b. Empirical reasoning
c. Ideological reasoning
, What is comparative reasoning? On what skill is it based?
Comparative reasoning is this-is-like that reasoning. We rely on something familiar to interpret
and understand something that is less familiar. It is based on pattern recognition.
We learned four tests for evaluating arguments: truthfulness of the premises, logical strength,
relevance, and non-circularity. How well do these tests work with respect to evaluation
comparative reasoning? Consider each of the four tests
a. The four tests of evaluating arguments do not work well in evaluative comparative reasoning
because it does not seek to determine whether a conclusion is true or not.
b. Truth of the premises does not work because points of comparison are not connected in a
way that permits us to say one is more true than another
c. Logical strength reveals point of similarity and dissimilarity that make comparisons more or
less plausible, rather than logical or illogical.
d. Relevance is not easily apparent; the argument offers observations to establish relevance
e. Non-circularity does not apply because comparative inferences flow from what we know to a
projection of what may be true
Briefly explain how we can determine if one comparison is more comprehensive that another
We can determine if a comparison is more comprehensive by assessing which one captures a
greater number of essential features.
According to the text, the basic question to ask when evaluating a comparison between two
objects or ideas or events is "Are they alike enough in the important ways or not?". What are
those "important ways" that determine the credibility of conclusion based on similarities?
The five criteria for evaluating comparative reasoning are familiarity, simplicity,
comprehensiveness, productivity, and testability.
In your own words, define empirical reasoning
Empirical reasoning is inductive and based on observations. It takes observations and "bottoms
up" to predict probabilities.
What are the three defining characteristics of empirical reasoning?
a. Fundamentally inductive
b. Self-corrective
c. Open to scrutiny and independent verification
What is the purpose of empirical reasoning?
Seventy-three percent of the people surveyed said that they wanted universal health care
coverage. Fifty-four percent said that they were worried about the cost of the program or the
quality of the care that would be provided. Therefore, the American people are opposed to
the President's health care reform legislation. Using the 4 tests for evaluating arguments,
evaluate the worthiness of the example. Remember, if the argument fails a test, you do not
need to go further. Give a detailed explanation in support of your evaluation. If the argument
contains a fallacy, explain what you think the fallacy is.
Truthfulness of the premises - we must assume that the data collected by the speaker is true,
therefore it passes the test
Logical strength - The conclusion states that the American people are opposed to the
President's healthcare reform. However, 73% of the people surveyed said that they did want the
universal health care coverage which is more than the 54% who said they were worried about
it. Therefore it is not logical for the speaker to conclude that American's are against the reform.
The argument fails this test. I believe the argument contains the hasty generalization fallacy.
There is too little information to conclude that American's are against health care reform.
But if we don't study together, then I'm not going to get through the course. And if I don't get
through the course, then I'm going to ruin my GPA and lose my financial aid. So if we don't
study together tonight, then I'm going to lose my financial aid. What test does this argument
fail? What fallacy does the argument contain?
The argument fails the test of logical strength. It is not logical to assume that by not studying
together tonight, the student will lose his financial aid. There are many other factors that could
play into the loss of financial aid. The arguments contains the slippery slope fallacy which entails
falsely linking events, generally to a bad or poor result.
1. What are the three fundamental reasoning strategies listed in the text?
a. Comparative reasoning
b. Empirical reasoning
c. Ideological reasoning
, What is comparative reasoning? On what skill is it based?
Comparative reasoning is this-is-like that reasoning. We rely on something familiar to interpret
and understand something that is less familiar. It is based on pattern recognition.
We learned four tests for evaluating arguments: truthfulness of the premises, logical strength,
relevance, and non-circularity. How well do these tests work with respect to evaluation
comparative reasoning? Consider each of the four tests
a. The four tests of evaluating arguments do not work well in evaluative comparative reasoning
because it does not seek to determine whether a conclusion is true or not.
b. Truth of the premises does not work because points of comparison are not connected in a
way that permits us to say one is more true than another
c. Logical strength reveals point of similarity and dissimilarity that make comparisons more or
less plausible, rather than logical or illogical.
d. Relevance is not easily apparent; the argument offers observations to establish relevance
e. Non-circularity does not apply because comparative inferences flow from what we know to a
projection of what may be true
Briefly explain how we can determine if one comparison is more comprehensive that another
We can determine if a comparison is more comprehensive by assessing which one captures a
greater number of essential features.
According to the text, the basic question to ask when evaluating a comparison between two
objects or ideas or events is "Are they alike enough in the important ways or not?". What are
those "important ways" that determine the credibility of conclusion based on similarities?
The five criteria for evaluating comparative reasoning are familiarity, simplicity,
comprehensiveness, productivity, and testability.
In your own words, define empirical reasoning
Empirical reasoning is inductive and based on observations. It takes observations and "bottoms
up" to predict probabilities.
What are the three defining characteristics of empirical reasoning?
a. Fundamentally inductive
b. Self-corrective
c. Open to scrutiny and independent verification
What is the purpose of empirical reasoning?
