Rutgers University
Name _______________________________________
1. If x is causally sufficient for y, then it is necessary that y is
___________________________________________________ for x.
2. Construct an evil twin for the following valid argument form:
P1: If Not-F then (A provided C)
P2: Not-F
C: A provided C
3. Damning evidence must be known by the arguer to whose argument it applies.
(i.) TRUE (ii.) FALSE (iii.) Spurious! (iv) unknowable
4. 0 + 0 = 2 is _____________________________ for getting married.
5. Given a proof by contradiction (PBC) whose support is .4 and whose original premises are false, the negation of the conclusion (i.) must be true (ii.) cannot be true (iii.) is perverse (iv.) can’t be evaluated for truth.
6. If x is a node in a hierarchically organized tree structure, then it is ________________________________ for all nodes in the tree structure higher than it.
7. P1: 88% of all Rutgers/Newark students will get drunk this weekend. P2: Booze-Head is a Rutgers/Newark student. What can be inductively concluded about Booze-Head from these premises?
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
8. (i.) Every (ii.) Not every (iii.) No substitution instance of the following argument form is valid:
P1: If not-not-q then (not-p or not-q)
P2: Not-(Not-p or not-q)
C: Not-not-q
9. When you infer “x is causally sufficient for y” from “x is sufficient for y” without additional information, you have committed the
_____________________________________________________________________.
10. (i.) Every (ii.) Not every (iii.) No substitution instance of the following argument form is invalid:
P1: If p then not-q
P2: not-not-q
C: not-not-not-p
11. Attending logic class and listening to Mozart’s music is
________________________________________________ for squaring the circle.
12. The reason why a PBC with support 0 is worthless is that
____________________________________ in which the augmented premise set is true,
but you do not know which one it is.
13. When we conjecture x causes y and perform an experiment to prove this is so, how do we rule out the case that y causes x AND x and y occur at the same time?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
14. If you encounter a substitution instance of Disjunctive Syllogism in which the second premise is clearly true, is it rational for you to believe the conclusion?
(i) YES (ii) NO (iii) MAYBE (iv) Indeterminate
15. Suppose that you conduct a poll for a Presidential Election (in the United States) by going to various medical care facilities to interview people both working there and who are there for medical treatments. Suppose you have a true random sample of all medical care facilities in the United States. Is your poll subject to the fallacy of bias?
(i) YES (ii) NO
