Title: Academic Argument
Course: Question Banks

Q: Which of the following is the BEST description of an argumentative essay?
- Darius writes a paper about how to best wash laundry without causing damage to the clothes. He claims that doing laundry can be both good and bad for clothing, and writes about the pros and cons. (Incorrect. While Darius’ paper may be informational, he does not make a claim one way or another.)
- Sharice writes an essay about the benefits of taking a gap year before starting college. She uses passionate and emotional language, insisting that those who don’t take a gap year are ruining their lives. (Incorrect. This topic could make for a great argumentative essay, but Sharice’s use of emotionally charged language isn’t ideal for academic argumentative essays.)
- Paul writes an essay about why teachers should be paid more. He cites evidence that they get paid less than most other people who go to college. (Incorrect. This could make for a great argumentative essay, but in this example, all we know is that Paul cites evidence that teachers get paid less than others. This is true, but if he wants to make a strong argument that teachers should be paid more, then he needs to support that claim with evidence.)
- Lexi writes a paper about the causes of World War I. She claims that it was mostly caused by rising nationalism and militarism among countries, and provides evidence to support her assertions. (Correct! Lexi makes a claim that WWI was caused by nationalism and militarism, then supports that with evidence. This is an example of a causal argument.)
A: Lexi writes a paper about the causes of World War I. She claims that it was mostly caused by rising nationalism and militarism among countries, and provides evidence to support her assertions.

Q: Josh has been assigned to write an essay evaluating whether a book in his Young Adult Literature class is fit to be taught in high schools. What will make his argument the most effective?
- stating that it’s his favorite book so it should be taught (Incorrect. In an academic argumentative essay your opinion isn’t strong enough evidence to argue for or against something.)
- writing about how the book made him feel (Incorrect. Though your feelings about a book are important to you, they are not strong or specific enough evidence to convince your audience in an argumentative essay.)
- a summary of the book’s plot (Incorrect. A summary alone will not make his argument effective. It does not establish why the book is a good or bad choice to be taught in schools.)
- listing three specific criteria he’ll use to evaluate the book as good or bad (Correct! When evaluating something as good or bad in an argumentative essay, you should clearly state the specific criteria you’re using to judge the object of your argument.)
A: listing three specific criteria he’ll use to evaluate the book as good or bad

Q: Which is the BEST example of a thesis for a proposal argument?
- Over 40% of Americans suffer from obesity and its resulting health concerns, such as diabetes and heart disease. (Incorrect. This is a statistic. It does not state a problem or a solution.)
- Obesity in young children is a big problem in America. (Incorrect. This states a problem but does not include a proposed solution.)
- Obesity in young children is caused by a lack of exercise and eating too much sugar. (Incorrect. This does not establish a clear problem or solution.)
- Obesity among children in America increases every year, threatening their health and quality of life. In order to combat these threats, schools should increase physical education and decrease the number of sugar-rich snacks available. (Correct! This thesis statement clearly states the problem and outlines specific solutions to address that problem.)
A: Obesity among children in America increases every year, threatening their health and quality of life. In order to combat these threats, schools should increase physical education and decrease the number of sugar-rich snacks available.

Q: Which of the following is the most effective argumentative thesis statement?
- There are real advantages and disadvantages to being homeschooled. (Incorrect. An argumentative thesis takes a position, asserting the writer’s stance, and this is just a generic statement, without a position.)
- Many toy companies create advertisements to appeal to young children. (Incorrect. A good thesis statement should be debatable, assertive, reasonable, evidence-based, and focused. This statement is not debatable because it doesn’t take a stance, and is presented only as a statement of fact.)
- War is a huge problem that must be solved. (Incorrect. Few people would disagree that war is a problem. An argumentative thesis presents an assertive, debatable claim.)
- The problem of homeless youth can best be solved by private charities. (Correct! A good thesis statement should be debatable, assertive, reasonable, evidence-based, and focused.)
A: The problem of homeless youth can best be solved by private charities.

Q: Evaluate these two thesis statements. Which one is stronger, and why?

1. The local government is comprised of the mayor, the people he elects to help him, and the police, who work hard in the community to keep the peace.
2. While e-learning has been criticized for isolating learners and not letting them make the social connections essential for real learning, most recent studies show that e-learning actually strengthens learners’ social skills.
- A, because this is an issue that broadly affects almost all readers, so it has near-universal appeal. (Incorrect.)
- A, because the claim “work hard in the community” can be proven with research. (Incorrect. Statement A is not actually making a claim.f)
- B, because it’s shorter. (Incorrect. Length does not determine a strong thesis statement. This is better because it is a claim that is provable by research.)
- B, because it is a claim that is provable by research, while A’s claim is much too vague. (Correct)
A: B, because it is a claim that is provable by research, while A’s claim is much too vague.

Q: The following is an argumentative thesis: Federal aid to Head Start programs should be increased to address the kindergarten readiness issue affecting children in poverty.
- False (Incorrect. The statement presents an assertive, debatable, reasonable, focused claim that can be supported with evidence.)
- True (Correct. The statement presents an assertive, debatable, reasonable, focused claim that can be supported with evidence.)
A: True

Q: Which of the following statements meets all the criteria of an argumentative thesis?
- Many people visit dogs at shelters. (Incorrect. This is a statement of fact and not debatable.)
- Stray dogs present a problem in many rural areas. (Incorrect. Most people would agree with this statement so it is not debatable.)
- Dog owners who do not control their pets should be made to eat dog food. (Incorrect. This statement is not reasonable.)
- The no-kill policy at the local shelter needs to be reconsidered because the increasing stray dog population is proving a hazard to the community. (Correct. This statement is assertive, debatable, reasonable, focused and can be supported with evidence.)
A: The no-kill policy at the local shelter needs to be reconsidered because the increasing stray dog population is proving a hazard to the community.

Q: Which of the following statements meets all the criteria of an argumentative thesis?
- While they are often seen as threats or pests, bees play an important role in pollination. (Incorrect. This is a statement of fact and not debatable.)
- The collapse of bee colonies around the country suggests the world is ending. (Incorrect. This statement may not be reasonable and is not focused.)
- Investing in beekeeping in urban areas is an up-and-coming trend, but will it solve the problems of bee colony collapse? (Incorrect. This is a question, not an arguable, assertive position.)
- While they are often seen as threats or pests, bees play an important role in pollination, and a look at the collapse of bee colonies around the country indicates we should invest in beekeeping in urban areas. (Correct. This statement is assertive, debatable, reasonable, focused and can be supported with evidence.)
A: While they are often seen as threats or pests, bees play an important role in pollination, and a look at the collapse of bee colonies around the country indicates we should invest in beekeeping in urban areas.

Q: Which of the following statements meets all the criteria of an argumentative thesis?
- Legalizing undocumented immigrants is the moral course of action. (Incorrect. This statement is based on values and cannot be supported with evidence.)
- In an era in which many areas of the country are searching for unskilled workers, legalizing undocumented immigrants is a hot-button issue. (Incorrect. This statement is an observation, not a debatable assertion.)
- Legalizing undocumented immigrants has benefits and drawbacks. (Incorrect. This statement is a fact, not a debatable assertion.)
- Legalizing undocumented immigrants benefits the economy. (Correct. This statement is assertive, debatable, reasonable, focused and can be supported with evidence.)
A: Legalizing undocumented immigrants benefits the economy.

Q: What are the supporting claims in an argument?
- properties (Incorrect. Properties are not supporting claims in an argument.)
- facts (Incorrect. Facts are not the supporting claims in an argument.)
- illustrations (Incorrect. Illustrations are not supporting claims.)
- premises (Correct! Premises are claims that support an argument’s conclusion.)
A: premises

Q: You are reading an opinion piece on collegiate education versus technical training in your social studies course. The author states, “Universites provide both practical experience and as well as an opportunity for their students to broaden their world view through required general education courses, therefore a universities provide better education than technical training.” What are the premises in his argument?
- Universities provide better education than technical training. (Incorrect. This is not a supporting claim. This is the conclusion.)
- Universities have required courses. (Incorrect. This claim does not support the conclusion of the argument.)
- Technical training does not provide sufficient education. (Incorrect. This is not a supporting claim for his conclusion, rather, this is part of the conclusion.)
- Universities provide pratical experience and an opportunity to broaden the world view (Correct! These are both claims that support the conclusion, which is that universities provide better education than technical training.)
A: Universities provide pratical experience and an opportunity to broaden the world view

Q: Kim is writing an essay for her freshman English class. In the introduction of her essay she argues, “School uniforms equalize students and reduce distractions to learning, therefore public schools should require their students to wear uniforms.” What is the conclusion of her argument?
- Uniforms reduce distractions to learning. (Incorrect. This claim is not supported by one or more premises and is not the main point of her argument..)
- School uniforms equalize students. (Incorrect. This claim is not the main point of her argument.)
- Equalizing students and reducing distractions is important. (Incorrect. This claim is not made in her argument, and is not the main point supported by premises.)
- Schools should require their students to wear uniforms. (Correct! Kim’s premises both support this conclusion, or the main point of her argument.)
A: Schools should require their students to wear uniforms.

Q: Read the following passage. Determine whether it demonstrates deductive or inductive reasoning.

- Wendy first noticed the shadow on her wall one night while reading a bedtime story to her brothers Michael and John. John was already asleep, but Michael was fascinated by her story of a far-off land where pixies and pirates fought battles with swords. The shadow appeared the next night, then the next, every time she read stories about this far-off place, a Neverland, if you will. Since the shadow appeared every night at story time, and only at story time, Wendy concluded that the shadow on her wall, which looked quite like a boy, was attracted by the stories.
/
- Deductive reasoning, because Wendy follows a chain of logic from a general idea to deduce that shadows are attracted by stories in the lamplight. (Incorrect. In this case, Wendy did not start with a general idea about the shadow that was then supported by her observations.)
- Inductive reasoning, because Wendy was reading into the situation, rather than deducing a solution from research and expert opinion. (Incorrect. Inductive reasoning starts with specific observations or examples and uses those to draw a conclusion.)
- Deductive reasoning because observes the shadow generally before drawing any conclusions. (Incorrect. Wendy observes the shadow exists, but does not draw any conclusion about it until she’s made several observations about when it appears.)
- Inductive reasoning, because Wendy starts with a specific observation, looks for additional examples, and makes a conclusion with a theory. (Correct! Inductive reasoning starts with gathering data, such as observations and examples, to make a general conclusion.)
A: Inductive reasoning, because Wendy starts with a specific observation, looks for additional examples, and makes a conclusion with a theory.

Q: Read the following passage. Determine whether it demonstrates deductive or inductive reasoning.

- Carrie was convinced that the rest of the students didn’t like her. She was surprised when one of the popular girls took her under her wing before the dance. The most handsome senior then asked her out on a date. While getting out of the house was difficult because her mother was a little obsessive, Carrie went to the dance with the handsome young man and was crowned Queen. Immediately after, a bucket of pig’s blood was dumped on her head. The whole auditorium laughed. Based on their reactions to this rather messy trick, Carrie concluded that she was disliked after all and proceeded to enhance the decorations in the auditorium with various flying students.
/
- Carrie used inductive reasoning, because she was reading into the situation and may have seen what she wanted to see, based on her previous beliefs. (Incorrect. Inductive reasoning looks at a set of data or examples and then draws a conclusion from those observations.)
- Carrie used deductive reasoning, because she looked at one incident and formed her hypothesis based on what she experienced. (Incorrect. Deductive reasoning starts with a general idea or theory and then looks for evidence to support that idea.)
- Carrie used inductive reasoning, because she thought back on past things that happened to conclude that students didn’t like her. (Incorrect. While using past examples and data to determine a general conclusion is an example of inductive reasoning, that is not what occurred in this specific passage.)
- Carrie used deductive reasoning, because she tested a hypothesis against the specific series of reactions of her classmates. (Correct! Carrie started with a theory and found evidence to support that theory.)
A: Carrie used deductive reasoning, because she tested a hypothesis against the specific series of reactions of her classmates.

Q: Which of the following is BEST illustrates deductive reasoning?
- The sun has risen in the east every day in recorded history. The sun always rises in the east. (Incorrect. In this case, collected data about what happened in the past was used to determine a general idea.)
- John failed math his freshman year. He failed again his sophomore year. John will always fail math courses. (Incorrect. This is not an example of deductive reasoning, as it uses two examples to determine a general conclusion.)
- A boy wearing white shoes won the 100 yard dash last year. This year, the one wearing white shoes also wore white shoes. Chad decides that he can only win the race if he wears white shoes. (Incorrect. Chad made a general assumption after looking at past examples, which is not an example of deductive reasoning.)
- Apples are a fruit. Honeycrisps are apples. Therefore, honeycrisp apples are a fruit. (Correct! Here, a general idea assumed to be true is used to determine another truth.)
A: Apples are a fruit. Honeycrisps are apples. Therefore, honeycrisp apples are a fruit.

Q: Indicator words like therefore, thus, hence, and consequently help you find an argument’s
- premises. (Incorrect. These words might come after an argument’s premises. They do not indicate premises.)
- assumptions. (Incorrect. These words indicate the main point of an argument.)
- questions. (Incorrect. Questions are not part of an argument.)
- conclusion. (Correct! These words indicate what the main point, or conclusion, of an argument is. They will usually appear after the argument’s premises.)
A: conclusion.

Q: Read the following passage from “Can 8 Servings of Fruits and Veggies Make You Happier?”

A study of 12,000 people published in the scholarly journal American Journal of Public Health found that those who started eating more fruits and vegetables felt much happier. On the basis of the study’s findings, health professionals at the University of Queensland are developing an ambitious and costly educational program to persuade people to consume more fruits and vegetables.

Suppose you are on the university board and have been asked to review the study yourself and decide whether the educational program should receive funding. Which of the following questions will be most important to your assessment of the study’s conclusions?
- Were the participants paid to be in the study, and how much will the educational program cost? (Incorrect. This information is irrelevant to the study’s conclusion. You would want to focus on the study’s premises and the support it has for its conclusion.)
- Should the university health professionals conduct their own study on the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables in order to obtain additional data? (Incorrect. This is not an assessment of the study’s conclusions. It would be more important to look at the assumptions and support in the study.)
- What fruits and vegetables did the people eat? (Incorrect. This information is not relevant to assessing if the conclusion of the study is valid and well-supported or not.)
- Are there other explanations for the participants’ increased happiness besides fruits and vegetables? (Correct! The study’s conclusion assumes that eating fruits and vegetables is the reason for increased happiness. It would be important to provide more evidence to support this conclusion before investing in a program based on this conclusion.)
A: Are there other explanations for the participants’ increased happiness besides fruits and vegetables?

Q: Consider the following poll question: “Which political party do you think is best equipped to bring the federal government’s reckless spending under control?

Which of the following is a suppressed premise of this question, with a misleading underlying assumption?
- Political parties are out of touch. (Incorrect. Political parties being in touch is not brought into question or assumed in this question.)
- The people taking the poll belong to a political party. (Incorrect. The question does not assume membership in a party.)
- The political party in power is out of control. (Incorrect. This specific question doesn’t reference a specific political party.)
- The federal government’s spending is reckless. (Correct! By wording the question this way, the pollster assumes that the government’s spending should be considered reckless. There is no evidence given to support this assumption.)
A: The federal government’s spending is reckless.

Q: Appeals to logos are which of the following?
- Appeals to emotions. (Incorrect. Appeals to pathos focus on emotions.)
- Appeals to credibility (Incorrect. Appeals to ethos focus on credibility.)
- Appeals to generally understood opinion. (Incorrect. Appeals to logos do not include opinions.)
- Appeals to logic or reasoning. (Correct! Logos appeals to logic or reasoning using statistics or factual information.)
A: Appeals to logic or reasoning.

Q: Maude is writing a paper arguing for a campus smoking ban. Which kind of support would be an appeal to logos?
- A statement from the university's leading cancer researcher about the dangers of smoking while in college. (Incorrect. This is an appeal to credibility, or ethos.)
- Images of cancerous lungs and grieving families. (Incorrect. Photos of cancerous lungs would be an appeal to emotion, or pathos.)
- A video of students relating their negative experiences with tobacco use. (Incorrect. This would be an appeal to emotion, or pathos.)
- Data from university landscaping about the volume of cigarette butts collected from the ground. (Correct. Statistics and data appeal to logos.)
A: Data from university landscaping about the volume of cigarette butts collected from the ground.

Q: Jared is writing a paper arguing for free parking on campus. What kind of support would NOT be an appeal to logos?
- Data from the university about the cost of paying for parking enforcement versus the revenue received from parking passes. (Incorrect. This is an appeal to logos as it uses data.)
- Policies from peer institutions that are more flexible and accommodating with their parking policies. (Incorrect. This is an appeal to logos as it uses factual information.)
- Listing the costs facing students, including the cost of parking passes and parking tickets. (Incorrect. Listing facts is an appeal to logos.)
- Testimony from students about the hardships of having to pay dozens of parking tickets a semester. (Correct. This would be an appeal to emotion, or ethos.)
A: Testimony from students about the hardships of having to pay dozens of parking tickets a semester.

Q: You read a sociological study of marriage rituals in rural India. Later you learn that the study’s authors had fabricated some of the data. Which of the following would be most damaged by your discovery?
- Sufficiency (Incorrect. Evaluating sufficiency includes looking for enough evidence.)
- Typicality (Incorrect. Typicality evaluates whether or not the evidence is representative or typical.)
- Relevance (Incorrect. Relevance evaluates whether or not the evidence is related to or relevant to the argument.)
- Accuracy (Correct! Because the author fabricated the data, it could no longer be considered accurate.)
A: Accuracy

Q: While writing about the impact of divorce on children, you find an article that cites a study that concluded a small percentage of children of divorced couples are later diagnosed with depression. Which measure of the STAR criteria does this statistic NOT meet?
- Accuracy (Incorrect. Given the information, there is no reason to believe the statistic is false.)
- Relevance (Incorrect. The impact of divorce on a child’s mental health would be relevant to this subject.)
- Logos (Incorrect. This is an appeal to logos, using factual information.)
- Typicality (Correct! If it is only one statistic, and a small percentage, it cannot be deemed a typical result.)
A: Typicality

Q: Which question would you ask yourself to determine if a piece of evidence meets the Sufficiency measure of the STAR method?
- Is the cited information true? (Incorrect. This question would help determine if a piece of evidence meets the Accuracy measure.)
- Is the evidence a good representation of its claim? (Incorrect. This question would determine if the evidence meets the Typicality measure.)
- Is the cited information up to date? (Incorrect. This question helps determine whether or not the information fits the Accuracy measure.)
- Is there enough cited evidence to support the conclusion? (Correct! For a piece of evidence to meet the Sufficiency measure, there has to be enough evidence for the audience to accept it.)
A: Is there enough cited evidence to support the conclusion?

Q: Appeals to pathos are which of the following?
- Appeals to logic or reasoning (Incorrect. Appeals to logos focus on logic or reasoning.)
- Appeals to credibility (Incorrect. Appeals to ethos focus on credibility.)
- Appeals to opinion (Incorrect. Opinion is not an appeal to pathos.)
- Appeals to emotions (Correct. Appeals to pathos focus on emotions.)
A: Appeals to emotions

Q: Which of the following is not a way in which an author may try to connect with an audience in an attempt to appeal to pathos?
- Connecting through values (Incorrect. A writer may try to use an appeal to pathos by connecting with an audience's values.)
- Connecting through attitudes (Incorrect. A writer may try to use an appeal to pathos by connecting with an audience's attitudes.)
- Connecting through beliefs (Incorrect. A writer may try to use an appeal to pathos by connecting with an audience's beliefs.)
- Connecting through critical reasoning (Correct. Since critical thinking involves removing emotion, this is not a way in which an author would try to connect with an audience in an attempt to appeal to pathos.)
A: Connecting through critical reasoning

Q: Eunice Higgins needs to analyze the following advertisement:

She thinks the figures in the four corners of the ad represent an appeal to pathos. Is she correct?
- Yes, the figures are meant to look like doctors and they convey additional credibility. (Incorrect. An appeal to pathos does not include an appeal to credibility.)
- No, the figures are realistic representations of drunkards and are an appeal to logos. (Incorrect. The figures aren’t meant to be realistic or an appeal to logic or critical thinking.)
- No, most people know logically that drunk people don’t look like that. (Incorrect. Because the figures are exaggerated and unrealistic, they are not meant as an appeal to logic.)
- Yes, the drunken figures are meant to look ridiculous, and remind viewers of the ad that they do not want to be drunkards. (Correct! Because the figures look ridiculous, they will most likely catch the audience’s attention by evoking the emotion of disgust or amusement.)
A: Yes, the drunken figures are meant to look ridiculous, and remind viewers of the ad that they do not want to be drunkards.

Q: When you evaluate an appeal to ethos, you are considering:
- How successfully the author appeals to emotion. (Incorrect. Appeals to emotion are pathos appeals.)
- How successfully the author establishes logic. (Incorrect. Appeals to logic are logos appeals.)
- How successfully the author appeals to critical thinking. (Incorrect. Critical thinking is an appeal to logos.)
- How successfully the author establishes credibility. (Correct. Ethos refers to credibility.)
A: How successfully the author establishes credibility.

Q: When you evaluate an appeal to ethos, you should consider each of the following areas EXCEPT:
- The author's background. (Incorrect. The author's background is a part of ethos.)
- The evidence and sources. (Incorrect. The evidence and sources are a part of ethos.)
- The author’s willingness to acknowledge opposing viewpoints. (Incorrect. An author’s willingness to engage with the opposition helps appeal to ethos.)
- The emotions the writing evokes. (Correct. This is an appeal to pathos rather than ethos.)
A: The emotions the writing evokes.

Q: You read an essay analyzing the methods used by codebreakers in World War II. Later you learn that the book’s author exaggerated her credibility as an expert source. Which of the following would be most damaged by your discovery?
- Your opinion of the author’s appeal to deductive reasoning (Incorrect. The author’s appeal to reasoning would be an appeal to logos.)
- Your opinion of the author’s appeal to pathos (Incorrect. This would not be considered a damaging appeal to the emotion of the piece.)
- Your opinion of the author’s appeal to logos (Incorrect. Credibility is not an appeal to logos.)
- Your opinion of the author’s appeal to ethos (Correct! Establishing an author’s credibility is an appeal to ethos.)
A: Your opinion of the author’s appeal to ethos

Q: Naomi Harper needs to analyze the following advertisement:

She wants to claim that the ad relies on a false appeal to ethos to sell pills. What is her best evidence for this claim?
- The cartoon figures of drunken people in the four corners of the ad confirm that the ad is targeted at credible drunks. (Incorrect. The figures are exaggerated forms, not credible representations.)
- The use of language like "free from desire" and “evils of intemperance" is designed to guilt and/or shame customers into buying the pills. (Incorrect. Any appeal to emotion would be an appeal to pathos.)
- The claim that the pill can cure drunkeness. (Incorrect. This claim in the ad does not include any source, credible or otherwise.)
- The quotations in the bottom panel by reputable citizens (and witnessed by the sheriff) give the ad's claims an inflated sense of credibility. (Correct! The information given is too limited to establish these citizens as credible sources.)
A: The quotations in the bottom panel by reputable citizens (and witnessed by the sheriff) give the ad's claims an inflated sense of credibility.

Q: Each of the following is a way to establish your ethos as a writer EXCEPT:
- Explaining your education as it is related to the issue. (Incorrect. Explaining your related education is a way to establish ethos.)
- Explaining your experience with the issue. (Incorrect. Explaining your related experience is a way to establish ethos.)
- Citing experts who have relevant experience with the issue. (Incorrect. Using relevant sources is a way to establish ethos.)
- Linking the opposition with an unpopular group. (Correct. This technique, called guilt by association, is a logical fallacy that misuses ethos appeals.)
A: Linking the opposition with an unpopular group.

Q: Sophomore student Marcus is writing a paper for his philosophy course on Plato. He has never studied Plato before. Which of the following is a good way for him to establish ethos in the paper?
- Mention that his roommate's father is Greek. (Incorrect. Vague associations with Greek culture will not establish ethos.)
- Explain how interesting the course has been, especially the section on Plato. (Incorrect. Flattering the professor will not establish ethos.)
- Explain honestly that he has never studied Plato before. (Incorrect. Claiming ignorance does not establish ethos.)
- Incorporate evidence from well-regarded philosophy journals. (Correct. Demonstrating that he has thoroughly researched the topic through well-regarded sources in the field will establish ethos.)
A: Incorporate evidence from well-regarded philosophy journals.

Q: What kind of rhetorical appeal is illustrated in this example?

- “Before I went back to school,” she said, “I used to work in the food industry. I spent 20 years as a prep cook and then a chef. The best way to chop an onion is to make sure that it is washed. Also, make sure that you wash your hands afterwards. I once wiped my watering eyes with my oniony hands, temporarily blinding myself in the process!”
- Logical Appeal (Logos)
- Emotional Appeal (Pathos)
- Timely Appeal (Kairos)
- Authoritative Appeal (Ethos)
A: Authoritative Appeal (Ethos)

Q: What kind of rhetorical appeal is illustrated in this example?

- “Never trust someone who doesn’t like pets,” he said. “Moral, ethical people take care of the weak and needy; pets are weak and often needy. Most importantly, dogs and cats have been bred to look like our own children--what kind of jerk hates children?”
- Logical Appeal (Logos)
- Authoritative Appeal (Ethos)
- Timely Appeal (Kairos)
- Emotional Appeal (Pathos)
A: Emotional Appeal (Pathos)

Q: What kind of rhetorical appeal is illustrated in this example?

- Making improvements to the local public transportation system is vital to the economic growth of our region. Ridership has risen 12% in the past year, even though some routes have been eliminated and others decreased in frequency in that time. Surveys of local businesses demonstrate increased revenue when new bus route service is introduced in their area.
- Emotional Appeal (Pathos)
- Authoritative Appeal (Ethos)
- Timely Appeal (Kairos)
- Logical Appeal (Logos)
A: Logical Appeal (Logos)

Q: Emmett was reading a paper about the importance of using water purifiers and read that people should use water filters because city water is always contaminated. The author jumped to this conclusion without providing evidence. This is an example of a hasty generalization type of
- illogical fallacy. (Incorrect. Illogical fallacy is a not a term used to describe)
- false dichotomy. (Incorrect. A false dichotomy is a type of logical fallacy.)
- non sequitur argument. (Incorrect. A non sequitur argument is a type of logical fallacy.)
- logical fallacy. (Correct! The author made a claim without sufficient evidence, which is an example of a logical fallacy.)
A: logical fallacy.

Q: In a political speech, the candidate argued that if you don’t vote for her, then you don’t support children. This is an example of a false dilemma type of
- illogical fallacy. (Incorrect. This could be considered illogical reasoning, but not an illogical fallacy.)
- straw man argument. (Incorrect. A false dilemma is a type of logical fallacy.)
- non sequitur argument. (Incorrect. A non sequitur argument is a type of logical fallacy.)
- logical fallacy. (Correct! Presenting two choices at the only choices without sufficient evidence is a type of logical fallacy.)
A: logical fallacy.

Q: Which is an example of a logical fallacy?
- Children should attend school to learn. (Incorrect. This is an opinion, but there are no errors in reasoning in this statement.)
- Dogs make good pets. (Incorrect. This claim does not contain unreasonable assumptions or illogical reasoning.)
- College professors should make more money because they play an important role in society. (Incorrect. This claim does not contain an unreasonable conclusion or errors in reasoning.)
- If you had been here on time, we wouldn’t have gotten in an accident. (Correct! This is an example of a post hoc ergo logical fallacy because this situation assumes that the accident was caused by being late, although that doesn’t have to be the case.)
A: If you had been here on time, we wouldn’t have gotten in an accident.

Q: Analyze the statement and then choose the fallacy.

- All widgets are spiky. All porcupines are spiky. Therefore, all porcupines are widgets.
- Red Herring because widgets are intended to distract the reader from the porcupines. (Incorrect. The widgets are not a distraction in the claim.)
- False dilemma because the statement deals only with porcupines, and it ignores hedgehogs and other animals with spikes. (Incorrect. The main claim does not present an either/or argument.)
- Appeal to ignorance because the reader doesn’t know whether a widget is spiky or not. (Incorrect. This knowledge is not essential to the main claiml.)
- Non sequitur because the relationship is neither causal nor directly following. (Correct! There’s a jump in reasoning in the relationship between porcupines and widgets. The premises do not support the deducted claim.)
A: Non sequitur because the relationship is neither causal nor directly following.

Q: After analyzing the arguments in an editorial essay, you find that there is a common pattern in the type of reasoning of the author. He uses Straw Man, Ad Hominem, and Red Herring logical fallacies. Explain the similarity between these fallacies.
- Each fallacy applies to causes and effects in a chain of events. (Incorrect. Each of these fallacies does not require cause and effect relationships.)
- Each fallacy is related to making decisions that may not be real or fully developed. (Incorrect. These fallacies do not mislead the reader by employing underdeveloped information.)
- Each fallacy is an appeal to logos. (Incorrect. These fallacies are not appeals to logic or critical thinking.)
- Each fallacy could be applied to a person or thing as a distractor from the main argument. (Correct! Each of these logical fallacies employ distraction to try to prove their point.)
A: Each fallacy could be applied to a person or thing as a distractor from the main argument.

Q: Concluding that vaccines cause autism is true because many celebrities believe it is
- Straw man (Incorrect. Strawman fallacies substitute another issue for the issue at hand.)
- False dichotomy (Incorrect. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario.)
- Rumor (Incorrect. A rumor is an unconfirmed story that is being circulated.)
- Bandwagon (Correct. Bandwagon fallacies make the claim that since others are doing something, you should do it, too.)
A: Bandwagon

Q: Concluding that all dogs are vicious because one dog snarls and bites is a
- slippery slope (Incorrect. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- false dichotomy (Incorrect. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario.)
- bias (Incorrect. Bias is a prejudice for or against something.)
- hasty generalization (Correct. Hasty generalizations make a general claim based on one or a few incidents.)
A: hasty generalization

Q: Assuming that because a mosquito infestation came after the building of a dam, the building of the dam caused the mosquito infestation is
- False dichotomy (Incorrect. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario)
- Slippery slope (Incorrect. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- Anachronism (Incorrect. An anachronism is a phrase or item appropriate to an earlier time period than the one in which it is being used.)
- Post hoc (Correct. Post hoc is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
A: Post hoc

Q: Proposing that legalizing marijuana will lead to a higher murder rate is
- Straw man (Incorrect. Strawman fallacies substitute another issue for the issue at hand.)
- Begging the question (Incorrect. Begging the question is a circular argument which assumes the truth of a premise with no evidence other than the premise itself.)
- Doomsday prophet (Incorrect. A doomsday prophet is someone who always expects bad things to happen.)
- Slippery slope (Correct. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
A: Slippery slope

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

Colorado, California, Washington, Oregon, and D.C. have legalized marijuana. Popular sentiment seems to be moving in that direction. I worry, though, that if we vote to legalize marijuana in every state, the next thing you know, we'll be talking about legalizing heroin. We already have a huge opioid epidemic in the country. Do we want even more heroin addicts?
- Post Hoc (Incorrect. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
- Ad Hominem (Incorrect. An ad hominem fallacy is an overt or subtle attack on a person's character or personal attributes.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Consider how the speaker is suggesting a small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- Slippery Slope (Correct. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
A: Slippery Slope

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

The votes are in, and Roberts ran away with the election. This district usually votes Republican, so that is why he won.
- Ad Hominem (Incorrect. An ad hominem fallacy is an overt or subtle attack on a person's character or personal attributes.)
- Hasty Generalization (Incorrect. A hasty generalization makes a general claim based on one or a few incidents.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Think about the implied causation in the passage. Just because X and Y both occur, does X necessarily cause Y?)
- Post hoc (Correct. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
A: Post hoc

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

My opponent argues that funding for schools should be the number one priority of the next legislative session. I am surprised that my opponent hates the military so much. I didn't realize he was anti-soldier. I, personally, am a huge fan of our brave soldiers abroad and at home.
- Ad hominem (Incorrect. An ad hominem fallacy is an overt or subtle attack on a person's character or personal attributes.)
- Bandwagon (Incorrect. Bandwagon fallacies make the claim that since others are doing something, you should do it, too.)
- False Dichotomy (Incorrect. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario.)
- Straw man (Correct. Strawman fallacies substitute another issue for the issue at hand.)
A: Straw man

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

This was a tough election. Dave Roberts ran a great campaign, and in the end he impressed enough voters in the district to win. I hope our district is better off with him in office.
- Bandwagon (Incorrect. Bandwagon fallacies make the claim that since others are doing something, you should do it, too.)
- False Dichotomy (Incorrect. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario.)
- Post Hoc (Incorrect. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
- No fallacy (Correct. No logical fallacy appears in this passage.)
A: No fallacy

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

The literature on the links between smoking and lung cancer seems so clear. But I think medical research is fallible. Take my grandmother for example. She smoked a pack a day and lived to 90. How harmful can smoking really be?
- Begging the Question (Incorrect. Begging the question refers to a circular argument which assumes the truth of a premise with no evidence other than the premise itself.)
- Post Hoc (Incorrect. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Consider how the writer makes a broad conclusion based on one incident.)
- hasty generalization (Correct. A hasty generalization makes a general claim based on one or a few incidents.)
A: hasty generalization

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

You know, that Virginia Starr may be a nice person and all, helping the orphans, feeding the stray cats, and building houses for the homeless, but she has got those tacky flamingos in her front yard and she wears those ridiculous hats. I just can't be around her and I told the preacher to talk her out of coming to the church ladies' league.
- Straw Man (Incorrect. Strawman fallacies substitute another issue for the issue at hand.)
- Post Hoc (Incorrect. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Think about the writer's attack on Starr's flamingos and hats.)
- Ad hominem (Correct. An ad hominem fallacy is an overt or subtle attack on a person's character or personal attributes.)
A: Ad hominem

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

Don't be worried about the game. The Steelers are the most clutch team in pro sports history. There is no chance they will lose Sunday.
- Hasty generalization (Incorrect. A hasty generalization makes a general claim based on one or a few incidents.)
- Slippery Slope (Incorrect. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Does the writer offer any proof that the Steelers are a clutch team other than saying the Steelers are a clutch team?)
- Begging the question (Correct. Begging the question refers to a circular argument which assumes the truth of a premise with no evidence other than the premise itself.)
A: Begging the question

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

That is a funny picture you took while driving on the highway. You could put it on your InstaCam, but everyone else in school is on FlashChat. You really should put it on your FlashChat story if you care about getting any new followers.
- Slippery Slope (Incorrect. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- Begging the question (Incorrect. Begging the question refers to a circular argument which assumes the truth of a premise with no evidence other than the premise itself.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Consider that the writer is suggesting that the picture should be on FlashChat because everyone else is using FlashChat.)
- bandwagon (Correct. Bandwagon fallacies make the claim that since others are doing something, you should do it, too.)
A: bandwagon

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

My opponent argues that funding for schools should be the number one priority of the next legislative session. I am surprised that my opponent hates the military so much. I didn't realize he was anti-soldier. I, personally, am a huge fan of our brave soldiers abroad and at home.
- Slippery Slope (Incorrect. Slippery slope fallacies suggest that a relatively small step will lead to a large-scale, significant effect or event.)
- Post Hoc (Incorrect. A post hoc fallacy is a causation fallacy in which the writer argues that because X and Y occurred, X must have caused Y.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Consider that the argument is about funding for schools, but the writer is discussing support for the military.)
- straw man (Correct. Strawman fallacies substitute another issue for the issue at hand.)
A: straw man

Q: Which logical fallacy occurs in the passage below?

This election boils down to whether you want to make your community better. We have crime problems, we have too much poverty, and we don't have enough local investment. Your choice is clear: You either vote for Dave Roberts or you vote against lifting up your community.
- Hasty Generalization (Incorrect. A hasty generalization makes a general claim based on one or a few incidents.)
- Ad Hominem (Incorrect. An ad hominem fallacy is an overt or subtle attack on a person's character or personal attributes.)
- No Fallacy (Incorrect. Consider that the writer is presenting an "either or" scenario.)
- False dichotomy (Correct. False dichotomies posit an "either or" scenario.)
A: False dichotomy

Q: Which of the following is not normally a part of rebuttal/refutation in an academic argument?
- Acknowledgement of opposing points of view (Incorrect. Writers wanting to rebut or refute claims need to acknowledge them first.)
- Use of qualifying terms if necessary (Incorrect. Writers should use qualifying terms unless they can state their claims absolutely.)
- Use of a respectful tone. (Incorrect. Writers should maintain a respectful tone to maintain their credibility.)
- Omission of facts that support a view opposing your main claim (Correct. Writers should include facts that support views opposing their claim because it helps to be thorough in accurately representing those views in order to better rebut/refute them.)
A: Omission of facts that support a view opposing your main claim

Q: In her paper about the benefits of public school, Mandi wants to strengthen her argument by including information about those who withdraw from public school to homeschool because they believe public school to be harmful. In one part of her rebuttal, she states, “All homeschooled children lack socialization and are socially awkward.” On her first draft, her professor circles this sentence in red, suggesting revision. How does this claim in her rebuttal compromise the success of her argument?
- Socialization of children has nothing to do with education. (Incorrect. This is a relevant claim.)
- The tone of the statement is not respectful. (Incorrect. The tone of this particular statement is not belittling or disrespectful.)
- The claim is grammatically incorrect. (Incorrect. In this case, grammar is not what damages the claim.)
- It is too broad a claim. (Correct! Making a claim about all homeschooled reduces her credibility. Qualifying words would help to narrow the claim and make it more believable.)
A: It is too broad a claim.

Q: While researching for his paper, Claude came across an article that opposed the main claim in his paper. The article made strong reasonable claims. Claude doesn’t want to include them in his rebuttal because he cannot prove the opposing claims completely wrong. Why should he reconsider?
- He shouldn’t. Including opposing views that aren’t obviously flawed will destroy his argument. (Incorrect. Ignoring opposing views might turn some of your audience off to your claim.)
- The more difficult the rebuttal, the stronger his argument will be. (Incorrect. The difficulty of a rebuttal is not what makes it strong. Complete, accurate representation of all sides of the issue will strengthen an argument.)
- Including opposing views to his main claim will show how smart he is (Incorrect. Acknowledging opposing views will increase the credibility of his claim, not establish his intelligence.)
- Acknowledging opposing views demonstrates a solid, well-rounded understanding of the argument (Correct! Even if you can’t prove that the claims are false, acknowledging that there are other ways of viewing the issue helps increase your credibility.)
A: Acknowledging opposing views demonstrates a solid, well-rounded understanding of the argument

Q: Which of the following is a key component of rebuttal/refutation?
- Making sure you win the argument using any means necessary (Incorrect. Academic argument is not about winning or losing. It is about thorough research and reasoned claims.)
- Using better sources than the ones you use to present the counterargument (Incorrect. You want to use quality sources to present all perspectives in your argument.)
- Only including the counterarguments that are easiest to disprove. (Incorrect. You want to fully and accurately represent the opposing arguments.)
- Using a tone that doesn't offend readers, even those who disagree with your claim (Correct. Using a respectful tone is an important part of building your credibility as a writer.)
A: Using a tone that doesn't offend readers, even those who disagree with your claim

Q: Hannah is writing an argument paper on why cosmetic companies should stop testing products on animals. She read a source that provided clear evidence showing how animal testing has saved thousands of human lives because scientists have been able to determine what products might cause illness or death in humans before they are sold to people. Which of the following options below is Hannah's best way to rebut or refute the source?
- She should not include the source in her paper because it goes against her main point and would hurt her claims. (Incorrect. Remember that you don't have to disprove a claim to rebut or refute it.)
- She should include the source in her paper but claim that it is not true because doing so would strengthen her own thesis. (Incorrect. Remember that you don't have to disprove a claim to rebut or refute it. Also, it would be dishonest of Hannah to misrepresent a source, even if it presents information that isn't convenient to her argument.)
- She should consider not refuting the source because a scientific study is irrefutable. (Incorrect. Ignoring opposing views or studies will only weaken her argument.)
- She should acknowledge that there may be truth to the source's claim but then offer realistic and credible alternatives to animal testing that would still benefit people. (Correct. Remember that you don't have to disprove a claim to rebut or refute it.)
A: She should acknowledge that there may be truth to the source's claim but then offer realistic and credible alternatives to animal testing that would still benefit people.

Q: Sarah is working on her argument paper on why her campus should offer a pet-friendly dorm. Her friend at a different university posted online that she has her cat with her at school, which prompted Sarah to do some research. She found over twenty .edu websites online with pet-friendly housing options, but she couldn't find any numbers suggesting the total number of four-year schools with such policies. She is now working on her section where she is refuting/rebutting claims that pets are a distraction to students, especially in the first year of their post-secondary education, and are a bad idea on campuses. Which of the following is her best option for phrasing in her paper?
- Most colleges and universities in America offer pet-friendly living options for students. (Incorrect. The word "most" implies at least a majority of schools, and Sarah doesn't have evidence that this is true.)
- Colleges and universities in America offer pet-friendly living options for students. (Incorrect. This is tricky. Even though the statement here is technically correct, it is misleading because readers may think the lack of a qualifying word means that "all" colleges and universities offer pet-friendly living options. Words like "many" or "several" make the statement much more precise and honest.)
- While a majority of colleges offer pet-friendly living options for students… (Incorrect. Sarah doesn't have evidence that this is true.)
- Many colleges and universities in America offer pet-friendly living options for students. (Correct. The word "many" is much safer than the other options here because it implies more than a few schools without giving an exact number or implying a majority.)
A: Many colleges and universities in America offer pet-friendly living options for students.

Q: Xavier is revising his argument paper because he received feedback that his coverage of counterargument is insufficient. His thesis statement is that football stadiums in his conference (the SEC) should be allowed to feature alcohol sales. He just found a credible source with numbers proving that the frequency of fights and arrests is higher at college sporting events where alcohol is sold. The source goes on to suggest that no additional college stadiums should feature alcohol sales because of the findings. Which of the following is the best way for Xavier to incorporate but rebut/refute the source?
- Xavier should include the numbers from the source but claim that the study shows mostly examples from schools in the North, so the results don't apply at SEC schools. (Incorrect. The results of the study likely have nothing to do with this region of the country. Claiming such could hurt Xavier's credibility.)
- Xavier should not include the source in his paper because the findings of the study are problematic to his own main claim. (Incorrect. Excluding valid information from the work just because it differs from his own claim is not going to help Xavier's credibility, and it leaves his paper open to an easy counterargument.)
- Xavier should mention that sometimes fights and arrests will be higher, but he should not include the data or numbers. (Incorrect. Excluding valid information from the work just because it differs from his own claim is not going to help Xavier's credibility, and it leaves his paper open to an easy counterargument.)
- Xavier should include the numbers from the source, acknowledging that an increase in drunkenness and rowdy behavior may result from alcohol sales, but suggest the extra revenue could cover increased security and still include large profits for the schools. (Correct. The source is definitely worth including, so Xavier's best bet is to acknowledge and accommodate the information and then rebut/refute the claim about expanding alcohol sales to other campuses.)
A: Xavier should include the numbers from the source, acknowledging that an increase in drunkenness and rowdy behavior may result from alcohol sales, but suggest the extra revenue could cover increased security and still include large profits for the schools.

Q: Arthur is preparing an argument to present for his class debate about addressing climate change, and he chooses to go with a classical framework in which he presents his case that climate change can be significantly slowed if meat consumption were lower. What should he do next?
- introduce the main idea of his argument (Incorrect. Arthur should have already done that when presenting his case about climate change.)
- conclude why his side is the most logical. (Incorrect. Before the conclusion, Arthur should first address the opposition.)
- find data to support his opinion. (Incorrect. While this is a good idea, in the classical argumentative framework, he should first address the opposition before providing proof for his own argument.)
- addressing the opposing viewpoint (Correct! Arthur should carefully spell out either side of the argument and refute their claims.)
A: addressing the opposing viewpoint

Q: When using Toulmin’s schema to organize an argument, it’s important to include a claim, data, and a warrant. Which of the following is the best example of a claim?
- Data shows that nearly 1 in 4 U.S. women will have an abortion in their lifetimes. (Incorrect. This is data to support the claim.)
- Adoption rates are on the rise. (Incorrect. This could potentially be considered backing for a claim or data.)
- Abortion rates are down in the United States. (Incorrect. This is data to support the claim.)
- Abortion should be illegal in America. (Correct! This is the claim.)
A: Abortion should be illegal in America.

Q: In a Toulmin argument, Sheena presents the claim that bike helmets should be required on campus. Her warrant is that people want to be safe and avoid injury. What is the rebuttal to this argument?
- Bike helmets are too expensive for everyone to have one. (Incorrect. This is a statement, not a rebuttal.)
- Campus police should provide free helmets to everyone who wants one. (Incorrect. This is a statement, not a rebuttal.)
- Helmets are annoying to carry around campus. (Incorrect. This is a statement, not a rebuttal. This could potentially be made into a rebuttal.)
- Lots of people are unconcerned about minor bike injuries. (Correct! The rebuttal to the warrant is that some people may not care about safety or avoiding injury.)
A: Lots of people are unconcerned about minor bike injuries.