UGRC 150: Critical Thinking and Practical Reasoning

Comprehensive practice flashcards covering UGRC 150 (Critical Thinking and Practical Reasoning), including sentence types, definitions, discourse forms, laws, deductive syllogisms, induction, causal reasoning, and informal fallacies.

How is Critical Thinking defined in the course?

It is the careful, deliberate determination of whether we should accept, reject, or suspend judgment about a claim, and a determination of the degree of confidence with which to accept or reject it.

What does it mean to say that Critical Thinking is "topic-neutral"?

It transcends and cuts across all academic disciplines and applies to every aspect of everyday life (such as medicine, law, politics, religion, culture, and the military).

What is meant by the phrase "sentence-shaped thought"?

It refers to human thought expressed or captured into a sentence, which allows thoughts to be subjected to scrutiny since we depend on what a person says to determine what they have in mind.

What are interrogative sentences, and what is their truth-value?

They are sentences expressed to seek information (questions); they are neither true nor false, meaning they have no truth-value and are not truth bearers.

What are imperative sentences, and do they possess a truth-value?

They are sentences expressed to get someone to perform an action (commands, requests, directives, instructions); they have no truth-value and are not truth bearers.

How can a sentence be explicitly interrogative but implicitly imperative?

When it is phrased as a question on the surface (e.g., "Could you direct me to the library?") but functions covertly as a polite request for someone to perform an action.

What is a declarative sentence (statement, proposition, assertion)?

A sentence that conveys information that can be either true or false, making it a truth bearer that possesses a truth-value.

What is a sentence fragment, and does it have a truth-value?

An incomplete sentence that does not express a complete thought (e.g., "Rice and stew"); it has no truth-value and is not a truth bearer.

Why do emotive expressions lack a truth-value?

Because they merely express feelings or exclamations (e.g., "Wow!", "Oh. What a day!") and provide no basis for rational evaluation.

What are the three types of declarative sentences identified in Unit 1?

Factual statements, value judgments, and definitions.

What characterizes a factual statement?

It informs by objectively describing what is there through sense observation; its truth or falsity depends on the object itself rather than the subject's viewpoint.

What characterizes a value judgment?

It informs by subjectively prescribing or evaluating how something or someone should or ought to be, expressing the viewpoint of the subject rather than objective facts about the object.

What are the two forms of value judgments?

Moral value judgments (e.g., "Abortion is evil") and non-moral value judgments (e.g., "This knife has a good edge").

What are the two constituent parts of a definition?

The definiendum (the word being defined) and the definiens (the part of the definition that gives the meaning).

What is the key distinction between a sentence and a statement?

A sentence is a collection of words expressing a complete thought, whereas a statement is a specific type of sentence that has a truth-value (can be true or false). All statements are sentences, but not all sentences are statements.

What is the difference between the connotation and denotation of a word?

Connotation refers to the meaning of the word, while denotation refers to the particular examples or instances in the world that the meaning applies to.

What is the fallacy of equivocation?

Using more than one connotation of a word in the same context without signaling the shift, with the intention to manipulate or persuade.

What is an ostensive definition?

A definition given by pointing to or demonstrating the object being defined.

What is an operational definition?

A definition that specifies a series of steps, operations, or instructions to identify or accomplish something.

What is a stipulative definition?

A definition established by fiat or mutual agreement among users to fix a specific meaning for a term (such as jargon or to settle disputes).

What is a real (ideal, eliminative, essential) definition?

A definition where the definiendum can replace the definiens in all contexts of use.

What is an open-textured (open class) concept?

A concept that has several connotations and whose meaning is essentially contestable even within the same discipline (e.g., family, justice, democracy).

What is a well-defined concept?

A term whose definition makes completely clear which objects, individuals, or properties are correctly called by that word, leaving its meaning incontestable in that discipline (common in deductive studies like Mathematics and Logic).

What are the four common flaws in definitions?

Being too broad, too narrow, circular (begging the question/tautology), or vague.

What are the four distinct types of discourse revealed in passages?

Narrative, instruction, rhetorical polemic, and argument.

How is a narrative discourse defined?

A passage that reports a sequence of events in order of their occurrence, arranged according to time.

How is an instructional discourse defined?

A passage that describes the sequence of things to do in a specified order or provides a list of directives to follow to accomplish a desired effect.

How is a rhetorical polemic defined?

A passage that communicates strong feeling or persuasively vents an opinion without offering logical proof.

What is the technical definition of an argument?

A set of statements consisting of premises offered as reasons/evidence to support, justify, or prove a single claim known as the conclusion.

What is a verbal dispute?

A disagreement that occurs because disputants are using the same words inconsistently or interpreting a word differently; it can be resolved by clarifying meanings or accepting a stipulative definition.

What is a substantive disagreement?

A genuine disagreement where disputants express differing viewpoints about facts or subscribe to contrasting values, which cannot be resolved simply by defining words.

What is the linguistic vice of vagueness?

A lack of clarity, distinctness, or precision where words have not been sufficiently specified to determine what in the world they refer to.

What is the linguistic vice of ambiguity, and what are its two forms?

When a word, phrase, or sentence conveys more than one distinct meaning; it can be lexical (concerning a specific word) or structural (concerning the syntax of the entire sentence).

How do empirical statements contrast with normative statements?

Empirical statements describe the way the world is based on sense experience and observation (verifiable), whereas normative statements prescribe or evaluate how things should or ought to be based on standards or norms.

Why are natural/scientific laws classified as empirical and "law-like"?

They describe observed regularities in nature and function as disguised predictions based on evidence; because counterevidence could theoretically falsify them in the future, they are called law-like hypotheses rather than absolute certainties.

Why are civil and statutory laws considered normative?

They are man-made prescriptive instruments backed by sanctions that dictate how citizens ought to behave; violations lead to punishment rather than rendering the law false.

How do customary laws differ from cultural norms?

Customary laws are long-established community rules backed by institutional authority (e.g., chiefs) that carry formal sanctions when violated, whereas cultural norms are social conventions that do not carry severe sanctions.

What defines a moral law?

A universal and unchanging rule of right living that transcends individual culture, religion, and civil statutes, having the sanction of conscience, moral nature, or natural justice.

What is the Principle (or Law) of Excluded Middle in logical laws?

A principle stating that for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true.

What is a deductive argument?

An argument where the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion; if the premises are assumed true, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false without creating a contradiction.

What is an inductive argument?

An argument where the premises provide evidence to show the conclusion is probably or likely true, but the conclusion does not necessarily follow with certainty.

What are the two parts of every proposition/statement?

The reference class (the subject/group being spoken of) and the attribute class (the property or characteristic ascribed to the reference class).

What distinguishes a particular statement from a general statement?

A particular statement has a finite, countable, and specific reference class (directly testable/verifiable), whereas a general statement has an infinite, uncountable reference class (indirectly testable/confirmable).

How do universal generalizations differ from statistical generalizations?

A universal generalization asserts an attribute of all members of an infinite reference class with no exemptions, while a statistical generalization asserts an attribute of only a subset of that infinite class.

How can the universal affirmative statement "All men are bullies" be translated into a disguised conditional?

"If $x$ is a man, then $x$ is a bully."

What is the argument form of Modus Ponens (affirming the antecedent)?

Premise 1: If $P$, then $Q$ (or All $X$s are $Y$s). Premise 2: $P$ (This is an $X$). Conclusion: Therefore, $Q$ (This is a $Y$).

What is the argument form of Modus Tollens (denying the consequent)?

Premise 1: If $P$, then $Q$ (or All $X$s are $Y$s). Premise 2: Not $Q$ (This is not a $Y$). Conclusion: Therefore, not $P$ (This is not an $X$).

What is the formal fallacy of Affirming the Consequent?

An invalid deductive pattern where one affirms the "then" clause: All $X$s are $Y$s; this thing is a $Y$; therefore, this thing is an $X$.

What is the formal fallacy of Denying the Antecedent?

An invalid deductive pattern where one denies the "if" clause: All $X$s are $Y$s; this thing is not an $X$; therefore, this thing is not a $Y$.

What is the False Hypothetical Syllogism fallacy?

Inferring that two different antecedents are identical simply because they share a common consequent (e.g., All $X$s are $Y$s; all $Z$s are $Y$s; therefore, all $X$s are $Z$s).

What two conditions are required for a deductive argument to be sound?

The argument must be formally valid, and all of its premises must be factually true.

What is an enumerative induction?

An inductive argument that lists or enumerates multiple verifiable particular premises as instances to support a generalized (law-like or statistical) hypothesis.

Why is a law-like hypothesis more valuable to an empirical scientist than a statistical hypothesis?

Because a law-like hypothesis has greater empirical content, higher predictive power, and is easier to falsify with a single counterexample.

Why are tautologies considered pseudo-scientific statements?

Because they are necessarily true under all conditions (e.g., "It will rain tomorrow or it will not rain"), making them unfalsifiable and empty of empirical content.

What is a necessary condition in causal reasoning?

A condition that must be present for the effect to occur.

What is a sufficient condition in causal reasoning?

A condition whose presence guarantees the occurrence of the effect, even though other conditions might also produce that effect.

How does J. S. Mill's Method of Agreement identify a probable cause?

By identifying a single antecedent condition that is consistently present across all different cases where the effect occurs.

How does J. S. Mill's Method of Difference identify a probable cause?

By comparing a case where the effect occurs with a case where it does not; if both cases share every antecedent condition except one, that differing condition is the probable cause.

How does J. S. Mill's Method of Concomitant Variation work?

By observing whether an increase or decrease in a suspected antecedent factor produces a corresponding increase or decrease in the effect.

What is the causal fallacy of Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

Concluding that because event $B$ occurred immediately after event $A$, event $A$ must have caused event $B$.

What is the fallacy of pseudo-precision (mathematical mystification)?

Using exact mathematical numbers or percentages to give a false impression of rigor or precision to an inherently vague concept.

What is the difference between dyslogistic and eulogistic ad hominem?

Dyslogistic ad hominem attacks an opponent's character or physical traits negatively, while eulogistic ad hominem praises the person's positive attributes (e.g., looks, eloquence) as an irrelevant reason to accept their claim.

What is the fallacy of misplaced vividness?

Focusing excessively on a sensational, provocative, or dramatic individual instance to deflect attention from the actual issue being evaluated.

What are semi-attached figures?

Irrelevant numerical data attached to a claim to give the illusion of meticulous research when the subject matter cannot be precisely measured.