fallacy of affirming the consequent argument form
1. Which one expresses the fallacy of affirming the consequent argument form? (a) If A, then B; Not A; It follows that not B.
(b) If A, then B; Not B; Therefore, and without a doubt, not A.
(c) A only if B. A. So, B.
(d) B. And, of course, A only if then B. Thus, and without a doubt, it has to be that A is true.
2. If the following argument is one of the 7 forms we covered (5 famous valid forms or 2 famous invalid forms), then write the name of the form and say whether the form is valid or invalid. If the argument is not one of the 7 forms, then write “unnamed form.”—If Frodo is saved, Gollum will lose his precious ring. Therefore, Gollum will lose his precious ring given that Sam makes it through Shelob’s lair. This is because Sam makes it through Shelob’s lair only insofar as Frodo will be saved.
Scheme of Abbreviation
Q: Gollum will lose his precious ring. P: Frodo is saved.
M: Sam makes it through Shelob’s lair
3. If Williams wins the election, recycling will become mandatory. Jarboe wins the election only provided that universal garbage collection will become mandatory. Since Williams will win the election or Jarboe will win it, it follows that either recycling or universal garbage collection will become mandatory.—This argument is:
(c) valid, but none of the five famous forms (d) disjunctive syllogism (valid)
(e) constructive dilemma (valid)
4. Put the following in standard form (at both the statement and argument level).—Ugly babies do not learn to drive. Why? Here are the reasons, one by one. (1) Either John does not like French women or John does not like girls. (2) John is overzealous if he does not like French women. (3) John does not like girls only on the assumption that he does not like police radar. (5) Primary prevention is not considered a chief priority.
Scheme of abbreviation
U: Ugly babies learn to drive.
F: John likes French women.
G: John likes girls.
Z: John is overzealous.
R: John likes police radar.
P: primary prevention is considered a chief priority.
5. What does cultural ethical relativism say about conformism?
(a) Conforming to the norms and values of your own culture is always right.
(b) Opposing the norms and values of your own culture is always wrong (and so if you were Jesus, living when and where he lived and doing what he did, your opposition to the norms and values would be wrong). (c) People ought to dress alike.
(d) a and b
(e) a and c
6. Construct a good counterexample in order to show that the following argument is a substitution instance of an invalid argument form. (Remember, “or” is used in an inclusive sense.)—Either Jones is at home or Jones is in his car. Jones is at home. Therefore, Jones is not in his car.
7. The advocate of ethical egoism would say that person A is necessarily doing the right thing in doing x if person A sincerely believes that he is doing the right thing in doing x (and, let us add, he really desires to do x).—T or F?
8. One popular misconception about philosophy is that it does not make real progress like the hard sciences. What would you say to someone who voiced such a misconception?
9. Another popular misconception about philosophy is that it is all just opinion. Why might someone think this and what would you say in response?
10. Could an Ethical Realist agree to the following claim: action x can be morally acceptable for me and yet at the same time morally unacceptable for you?
(a) Yes. Although you and I are doing the same action (say, watering the lawn), we might be in different circumstances (say, I am in a place where water is plentiful and you are in a place where water is lacking) such that it is morally acceptable—independent of anyone’s say-so—for me to do the action and it is morally unacceptable—independent of anyone’s say-so—for you to do that same action.
(b) No. It is saying that right and wrong differs between people, which means that right and wrong is relative to each person.
(c) No. Ethical realism says that what is acceptable for one person must be acceptable for every other person.
(d) b and c
(e) None of the above
- If you reject divine command theory, then that does not mean that you reject the existence of God.—T or F?
- According to divine command theory (and all the ethical relativist theories, for that matter), the fact that
child abuse causes physical and psychological trauma has no bearing on whether child abuse is wrong.—T or F?
13. Assume that you are an ethical egoist. Why does it seem that, in most cases at least, it is morally impermissible for you to defend ethical egoism, publically advocate for it?
(a) Because ethical egoism is a view defended by Ayn Rand, an infamous prostitute that no one would ever want to be associated with.
(b) Because ethical egoism is a form of a rather reprehensible view: ethical nihilism
(c) Because it is in your best interest to have others believe that it is right to promote your interests rather than theirs.
(d) a and c
(e) All of the above
- What distinguishes ethical relativism/conventionalism from ethical nihilism/subjectivism?
- (a) Ethical relativism holds that the truth of ethical statements depends on someone’s say-so whereas ethical nihilism holds that ethical truths are true regardless as to anyone’s say so.
- (b) Ethical relativism holds that right and wrong are determined by society/culture whereas ethical nihilism holds that right and wrong is determined by each individual (hence the fact that it is also called “ethical subjectivism”).
- (c) Ethical relativism holds that the truth of ethical statements depends on someone’s say-so whereas ethical nihilism holds that ethical statements have no truth value.
- (d) Ethical relativism holds that right and wrong are determined by someone’s say-so whereas ethical nihilism holds that statements concerning what is right or what is wrong are neither true nor false.
- (e) c and d
- Ethical egoism holds that you should never act in ways that benefit others.—T or F?
- Ethical egoism is the doctrine that each person always pursues his or her own interests.—T or F?
- In “B only if A,”
- (a) A provides a necessary condition for B.
- (b) B provides a sufficient condition for A.
- (c) A provides a sufficient condition for B.
- (d) A provides both a necessary and sufficient condition for B. (e) a and b
- Suppose that person O and person P both belong to the same culture. Suppose that O thinks that
homosexuality is morally impermissible whereas B says that homosexuality is morally permissible. According to cultural ethical relativism, the way to decide who wins the disagreement between A and B is simply to conduct a poll: if the majority of people in that culture agree with O, then O is right.—T or F?
19. Ethical Nihilism is the view that most ethical statements are difficult to prove or disprove.—T or F?
20. Cultural ethical relativism is the descriptive doctrine that customs vary from society to society.—T or F?
21. Should members of my culture impose its values on another culture? How will a consistent cultural ethical relativist answer this question?
(a) It is wrong for my culture to impose its own value on other cultures.
(b) It is wrong for my culture to impose its own values on other cultures even when those other cultures value committing atrocities.
(c) It is permissible for my culture to impose its own values on other cultures so long as those other cultures value committing atrocities.
(d) It is permissible for my culture to impose its own values on other cultures so long as it is done without military force.
(e) It is permissible for my culture to impose its own values on other cultures so long as my culture says that it is permissible.
22. Which form ethical relativism says that the following statement is false: “considered independent from anyone’s say-so, the actions of necrophiliac serial killer Ed Kemper are neither morally wrong nor morally right.”
- (a) Personal ethical relativism but not cultural ethical relativism and divine command theory
- (b) Cultural ethical relativism and divine command theory, but not personal ethical relativism
- (c) All the forms of ethical relativism
- (d) None of the forms of ethical relativism
- (e) None of the above
- Ethical relativism agrees with ethical realism that there are ethical truths—T or F?
- What is a common ethical-egoist reason why it is typically bad to harm others?
Some ethical egoists argue for ethical egoism by pointing out that the best way to promote everyone’s
interests is for each of us to adopt ethical egoism. What is the problem with this argument?
26. According to psychological egoism, we are able to perform an action only if we believe that it will promote our own interests. Describe a scenario that seems to refute psychological egoism.
27. Suppose that person O is an ethical realist who thinks that God exists and makes true pronouncements on ethical matters. One of these true pronouncements, suppose, is that x is impermissible. In this case, what is the correct direction of explanation according to O?
(a) God says that x is impermissible because x is impermissible
(b) x is impermissible on no other grounds than that God says so
(c) one is not allowed to do x because God says that x is impermissible (d) b and c
(e) none of the above
- Why is it that, if divine command theory is true, what God says concerning right and wrong is arbitrary?
- (a) To say that God’s decisions are arbitrary is to say that God has no reason for determining that it is wrong to do what it is wrong to do.
- (b) To say that God’s decisions are arbitrary is to say that God has sufficient reason for determining that it is right to do what it is right to do.
- (c) Divine Command Theorists must say that God has no reason for determining that it is wrong to do x (x being something wrong to do) because if there were another reason we would say that it is wrong to do x for this other reason, not because God commanded it (which violates divine command theory).
- (d) a and b
- (e) b and c
- One objection to divine command theory is that it does not seem workable. On what grounds is it commonly
argued that divine command theory is unworkable?
There is no way to determine, it seems, which God is the one true God—and even if we knew which
God was the one true God, divine command theory does not tell us how to distinguish legitimate divine
commands from illegitimate ones.
(b) Divine command theory entails morally abhorrent results such as that it would be morally obligatory to
rape innocent infants for fun if God commanded us to do so.
(c) Christianity, a white-man’s religion glorifying the meek, has been used—along with physical violence—
to have people accept their status as slaves of the white man.
(d) a and b
(e) None of the above
30. Using the relevant tools for evaluating inductive arguments, determine whether the following argument is successful. Make sure to explain your use of these tools led to your answer.
Istvan’s new car is bright blue, has fabric upholstery, and gets decent gas mileage. John’s new car is also bright blue and has fabric upholstery. Therefore, it probably gets decent gas mileage as well.
31. Using the relevant tools for evaluating inductive arguments, determine whether the following argument is successful. Make sure to explain your use of these tools led to your answer.
U.S. Senator Tom Coburn says that homosexual behavior is rampant in the Oklahoma school system. It is likely that this is true, therefore (after all, Oklahoma is Coburn’s home state and surely he knows about the schools in his own home state).
32. Using the relevant tools for evaluating inductive arguments, determine whether the following argument is successful. Make sure to explain your use of these tools led to your answer.
Chad, a beer sommelier (that is, an expert on beer), says that the new Hudson Valley beer, Gerbil triple IPA, is extremely bitter. Thus Chad finds Gerbil triple IPA disgusting.
33. Using the relevant tools for evaluating inductive arguments, determine whether the following argument is successful. Make sure to explain your use of these tools led to your answer.
On four separate occasions (across 2 years) I drank a can of Gerbil Triple IPA beer (from different six- packs) and found it bitter. Probably I would find every can of Gerbil Triple IPA beer bitter.
- Which of the following is true?
- (a) Ethical Egoism forbids person A being concerned with helping person B for B’s own sake.
- (b) Ethical Egoism forbids person A being concerned with helping person B.
- (c) Ethical Egoism holds that my helping others should only be done as a means to my own interests (d) b and c
- (e) a and c
- Using the relevant tools for evaluating inductive arguments, determine whether the following argument is
successful. Make sure to explain your use of these tools led to your answer.
Out of 100,000 surveyed voters from Orange County California (a county that is overwhelmingly Republican), 71 % reported that they would vote republican in the next governor election. Clearly the Republican candidate for governor will be elected.
36. Construct a good counterexample to show that the following argument is a substitution instance of an invalid argument form.
If evolution by natural selection is not a myth, then animal species are not fixed and immutable. Since
animal species are not fixed and immutable, it follows that evolution by natural selection is not a myth. Scheme of Abbreviation
E Evolution by natural selection is a myth
A: Animal species are fixed and immutable
37. Could an Ethical Realist agree to the following claim: what I think is morally right is not necessarily what you think is morally right?
(a) No. It is saying that right and wrong differs between people, which means that right and wrong is relative to each person.
(b) Yes. The fact that two people have differing moral opinions does not imply that there is not a correct answer. One person could be right and the other mistaken, or they both could be incorrect and the correct moral opinion might be a third option.
(c) Yes. Ethical Realism is the chief form of Conventionalism and the claim states one of the most popular forms of conventionalism: existentialism or personal ethical relativism.
(d) b and c
(e) none of the above
For questions 39-42 fill in the blanks with “necessary” or “sufficient” to make the following statements true. Afterwards, translate that statement into a conditional. (If you get both parts right of each question, then you get 2 points. If you get only one part of each question right, then you get only one point.)
39. Being a tiger is a ______________ condition for being an animal. 40. Being an animal is a ____________ condition for being a tiger.
41. Having a racket is a ______________ condition for playing tennis. 42. Burning leaves is a ______________ condition for producing smoke. 43. The following argument is invalid.—Tor F?
Which of the following express(es) the relationship between psychological egoism and ethical egoism?
(a) Ethical egoism is frequently used as a premise in arguing for Psychological egoism.
(b) It is possible to be an ethical egoist without being a psychological egoist.
(c) Psychological egoism is frequently used as a premise in arguing for Ethical egoism.
(d) B and C
(e) A and C
Since Moby Dick was written by Shakespeare, and Moby Dick is a science fiction novel, it follows that Shakespeare wrote a science fiction novel.
- All arguments must have more than one premise.—T or F?
- Cultural Ethical Relativism implies that each culture is morally infallible. What does this mean?
- (a) That each culture is tolerant.
- (b) That each culture ought to be tolerant.
- (c) If most of the people in a certain society believes that x is right, then there is a good change that x is right.
- (d) a and c
- (e) none of the above.
- An argument can have 100 premises.—T or F?
- An argument that draws a conclusion that something is true because someone has said that it is true is
typically a deductive argument.—T or F?
48. An argument that presents two alternatives and eliminates one, leaving the other as the conclusion, is an inductive argument.—T or F?
49. The most popular objection to Divine Command Theory is that it has morally abhorrent consequences. For example, it would be morally good to rape infants for fun if God said that it was morally good to do so. One might be tempted to defend divine command theory by reasoning in the following way: “But God would never say that raping infants for fun is good: raping infants for fun is bad.” Why is it, however, that Divine Command Theory is not allowed to give such a response?
(a) To say that “God would not say that x is morally good since x is morally bad” is to say that x being morally bad explains God’s saying that x is bad, but the direction of explanation provided by divine command theory is that God’s saying that x is bad explains x’s being bad.
(b) Such a response contradicts divine command theory, which says that there is nothing inherent in an action that makes it good or bad; the action has the moral standing that it does simply because God chooses to label it good or bad.
(c) Society dictates that God is not allowed to make such a response. (d) a and b
(e) b and c
50. In contrast to physics and microbiology, which are not essential to many other disciplines, logic is essential to every endeavor that involves any form of communication: the lawyer needs it to formulate arguments to a judge or jury, the physician needs it to give a credible rationale for the use of a medication, the businessperson needs it to write a coherent report, the anthropologist needs it to write a well-reasoned article, and literally everyone needs it in day-to-day dealings with friends, relatives, and associates.—T or F?
1. If it is not the case that argument x is a substitution instance of a valid argument form, then it must have an invalid form.—T or F?
2. Describe a scenario in which an ethical egoist would say that killing someone would be wrong. And then describe a scenario in which the ethical egoist might say that killing someone is morally right.
3. How do ethical skepticism and ethical nihilism differ?