i need help with a test
TEST 2 NAME: ________________________ STUDENT NUMBER: ___________________ PART I [2 marks for each question] One- or two-line answers called for: 1. Restate this conditional statement as a disjunctive statement: If our country is to be safe, we must increase military spending. 2. Restate this disjunctive sentence as a conditional sentence: Call me a taxi, otherwise I will forget. 3. Mother to child: “Either you behave in the grocery store or you can go home.” The precocious child to her mother: "Well, conceivably, I could also go to the ball game or play video games at my friend’s place.” Mother to child: “True enough.” Child: “Well, then, you just presented me with a false dilemma!” Mother to child: Well, actually I did not just present to you a false dilemma.” The mother is right. (As they usually are!) Briefly explain. 4. Is the following sentence vague or ambiguous? Why is that? I shot an elephant in my pajamas! 5. The International Astronomical Union in 2006 defined a planet as follows: a) a celestial body that goes around the sun; b) has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (that is, is large enough to form into spherical shape); c) is not the satellite of another body; and d) is large enough to “clear its orbit”. What sort of definition is this? 6. During this "armed situation", massive bombing attacks became "efforts". Thousands of warplanes didn't drop tons of bombs, but "weapons systems" or "force packages" "visited a site". These "weapons systems" didn't drop their tons of bombs on buildings and human beings, they "hit" "hard" and "soft targets". During their "visits", these "weapons systems" "degraded", "neutralized, "eliminated", "cleansed", "took out" targets.... Women, children, and other civilians killed or wounded during these "visits", and any schools, hospitals, museums, houses, or other "non-military" targets that were blown up, were "collateral damage", thanks to the "accidental delivery of ordnance equipment"--meaning bombs and rockets missed their original targets. Question: what do we call this kind of speech which makes terrible things sound better or sound not so bad? Part II (3 marks each) 7. What is the conclusion of the following argument? Briefly, what is the problem with the following argument? What is the fallacy called? Smoking is not actually addictive: Smokers can stop smoking if they wish to do so. Some people seem to try very hard to quit smoking without success, and sometimes they claim that they really want to stop smoking buy just cannot do so. But obviously those people (who say they are trying to stop smoking but cannot stop) do not really want to stop smoking, for anyone who truly wants to stop smoking can stop. 8. "There were 156 Covid deaths last February in British Columbia". Let's say this information is accurate. How might it be misleading? 9. What is wrong with the following assertion? Bananas are cowards! What is this "error" called? 10. This might be an unfair question--"When did you stop abusing your spouse?" How so? How might it be a fair question? When such a question is unfairly asked, what is the fallacy called? Part III (4 marks each) 11. Let's say, in an imaginary world, that some people have some worries about the risks of pregnant women taking thalidomide (a drug that was used to fight morning sickness), but that these arguments have been suppressed or ridiculed as "conspiracy theories". And let's say the official argument has been trotted out as follows. There is no evidence that taking thalidomide is risky --- This is evidence enough that taking thalidomide is perfectly safe! a) Is this a legitimate appeal to ignorance? Yes, or no? Why is that? (In one line.) b) What if the “official” response to the skeptics were “This talk about thalidomide being dangerous is just another conspiracy theory!” Would this be: an appeal to ignorance? Or ad hominem? Or begging the question? Briefly explain, in one line. c) What if the response were, “They’re not following the Science”? Would this be: an appeal to ignorance? Or ad hominem? Or begging the question? Briefly explain, in one line. 12. During jury deliberation, one juror argues in favor of a guilty verdict: “We’ve got to come to a decision. Is the defendant guilty or innocent? Well, it is certainly doubtful that the guy is innocent. After all, several witnesses saw him near the scene of the crime, and everyone agrees that he had a strong motive for killing the guy. So, which will it be? I say guilty!” How would you respond? 2