Think Again I: How to Understand Arguments Coursera Quiz Answers

Get All Weeks Think Again I: How to Understand Arguments Coursera Quiz Answers

Quiz 1: Why Arguments Matter

Q1. All Letters to the Editor give arguments.

View
False

Q2. Arguments are explicit ways to formulate reasons.

View
True

Q3. This course will be fun.

View
True

Quiz 2: What Is an Argument?

Q1. Arguments are verbal fights.

View
False

Q2. Every argument includes a conclusion.

View
True

Q3. All arguments are made up of (or expressed in) language

View
True

Q4. Every argument is intended to establish a conclusion that the audience did not believe before.

View
True

Q5. Every argument succeeds in giving good reasons for its conclusion.

View
False

Q6. Megafauna: n. very large animals.

View
No, this is not an argument.

Q7. Reptiles include turtles, alligators, crocodiles, snakes, lizards, and the tuatara.

View
No, this is not an argument

Q8. World War II occurred after World War I occurred.

View
Yes, this is an argument.

Q9. World War II occurred because World War I occurred.

View
Yes, this is an argument.

Q10. The sides of this right triangle are 1 meter long, so its hypotenuse is 2 meters long.

View
Yes, this is an argument.

Quiz 3: What are Arguments Used For? Justification

Q1. We need to understand the purpose of an artifact in order to understand that artifact.

View
True

Q2. Whether you succeed in persuading someone depends on what effect your argument has on that person.

View
True

Q3. Whether you succeed in justifying a conclusion depends on what effect your argument has on the audience.

View
True

Q4. Whenever you are trying to justify a conclusion, you are trying to persuade someone.

View
True

Quiz 4: Strong Arguments Don’t Always Persuade Everyone

Q1. If your argument does not persuade your audience, it is no good.

View
False

Q2. An argument that does not give any good reason to believe its conclusion can still persuade someone to believe its conclusion.

View
True

Q3. Sometimes people cannot be persuaded by very strong arguments because they refuse to give up their beliefs.

View
True

Q4. When people use arguments, they always intend to have some effect on other people.

View
True

Q5. Can any argument persuade every person in the world?

View
No

Quiz 5: What Else are Arguments Used For? Explanation

Q1. The goal of explanation is understanding.

View
True

Q2. All explanations are given in the form of arguments.

View
False

Q3. Whenever you predict that something will happen, you explain why it happens.

View
False

Q4. The population of India explains why it won more medals than the United States in the 2012 Olympics.

View
False

Q5. Why did he add more sugar? To make the cake sweeter.

View
teleological

Q6. Why is the pillow so soft? Because it is filled with duck feathers.

View
material

Q7. Why doesn’t the screwdriver work with the slotted screw? Because it is a Phillips screwdriver (with a cross-shaped end).

View
formal

Q8. Why did the tire on her car go flat? Because it was punctured by a nail.

View
causal

Quiz 6: What are Arguments Made Of? Language

Q1. The English language could use the word “death” to refer to life.

View
False

Q2. I can make the word “baboon” in the public English language mean my sister’s friends simply by stipulating that I personally will use the word “baboon” to refer to my sister’s friends.

View
True

Q3. People are always aware of the rules that they follow when they speak.

View
True

Q4. People are never aware of the rules that they follow when they speak.

View
False

Quiz 7: Meaning

Q1. Arguments are fallacious when they are spoken in heavy accents.

View
False

Q2. The meaning of the phrase “my car” is the same as the object that is my car.

View
True

Q3. We can describe the meaning of a word or sentence by specifying how it is used.

View
True

Q4. To say “I am sorry” is to apologize to someone even if that person does not forgive you, so apologizing is

View
a speech act

Q5. To utter a series of words that are meaningful together is to perform

View
a linguistic act

Q6. To alert someone to a danger is to make that person aware of that danger, so alerting is

View
a conversational act

Quiz 7: Linguistic Acts

Q1. The old man the ship.

View
No, it is not meaningful.

Q2. I feel as much like I did yesterday as I do today.

View
Yes, it is meaningful.

Q3. The cotton clothing is made of grows in Mississippi.

View
Yes, it is meaningful.

Q4. The square root of pine is tree.

View
No, it is not meaningful.

Quiz 8: Speech Acts

Q1. A verb fails the thereby test if there is any case in any circumstance where I say ‘I’ but I do not thereby

View
True

Q2. Whenever a verb passes the thereby test (that is, whenever the verb fits into the blank in “If I say ‘I ’ in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby ”), the verb names a speech act.

View
True

Q3. Concluding is a speech act.

View
True

Q4. When I say, “I order you to leave” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby order you to leave.

View
True

Q5. When I say, “I ordered you to leave yesterday” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby ordered you to leave yesterday.

View
False

Q6. When I say, “My sister orders you to leave” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby order you to leave

View
False

.

Q7. When I say, “I apologize for hurting you” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby apologize for hurting you.

View
True

Q8. When I say, “I am sorry for hurting you” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby am sorry for hurting you.

View
False

Q9. When I say, “I advise you to keep trying” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby advise you to keep trying.

View
True

Q10. When I say, “I convince you to keep trying” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby convince you to keep trying.

View
False

Q11. When I say, “I warn you of the danger” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby warn you of the danger.

View
True

Q12. When I say, “I make you aware of the danger” in appropriate circumstances, then I thereby make you aware of the danger.

View
False

Quiz 9: Conversational Acts

Q1. Verbs that name conversational acts pass the thereby test.

View
True

Q2. Informing is a conversational act.

View
True

Q3. A sentence can be true even when it conversationally implies something false.

View
True

Q4. For the following pairs of verbs, which one names a conversational act?

View
argue

Q5. For the following pairs of verbs, which one names a conversational act?

View
alert

Q6. Be relevant.

View
R = Grice’s maxim of relevance

Q7. Don’t say too little or too much (to serve the shared purpose of conversation).

View
S = Grice’s maxim of strength or quantity

Q8. Don’t say what you don’t believe or what you have no reason to believe.

View
Q = Grice’s maxim of quality

Q9. Be brief and orderly and not obscure or ambiguous.

View
M = Grice’s maxim of manner

Week 2: Think Again I: How to Understand Arguments Coursera Quiz Answers

Quiz 1: Argument Markers

Q1. Charles went bald because most men his age go bald.

View
is an argument

Q2. Charles went bald, and most men his age go bald.

View
is not an argument

Q3. My roommate likes to ski, so I do, too.

View
is not an argument

Q4. My roommate likes to ski, and so do I.

View
is not an argument

Q5. I have been busy since Tuesday.

View
is not an argument

Q6. I am busy, since my teacher assigned lots of homework.

View
is an argument

Q7. He apologized, so you should forgive him.

View
premise marker

Q8. In view of the fact that he apologized, you should forgive him.

View
premise marker

Q9. He apologized. Accordingly, you should forgive him.

View
neither

Q10. After he apologizes, you should forgive him.

View
neither

Q11.Seeing as he apologized, you should forgive him.

View
premise marker

Quiz 2: Standard Form

Q1. Indicate which of the standard forms best represents the argument for questions 1-6

Things are a lot quieter because Jesse James left town.

View

1. Things are a lot quieter.
2. Jesse James left town.

Q2. Because Jesse James left town, things are a lot quieter.

View
1.Jesse James left town.
2.Things are a lot quieter.

Q3. The hour is up, so you must hand in your exams.

View
1. You must hand in your exams.
2. The hour is up.

Q4. Other airlines will carry more passengers, for United Airlines is on strike.

View
1.Other airlines will carry more passengers.
2. United Airlines is on strike.

Q5. Since Chicago is north of Washington, and Washington is north of Charleston, Chicago is north of Charleston.

View
1.Chicago is north of Charleston.
2.Washington is north of Charleston
3.Chicago is north of Washington.

Q6. Texas has a greater area than Topeka, and Topeka has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo. Thus, Texas has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo.

View
1. Topeka has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo.
2. Texas has a greater area than the Bronx Zoo.
3. Texas has a greater area than Topeka

Quiz 3: A Problem for Arguments

Q1. Indicate the main problem in each of the following arguments for questions 1 and 2

Ram asks Walter which team will win the basketball tournament, and Walter says, “Duke, and I can prove it: Duke is going to win, so Duke will win. Now, prove that I am wrong!”

View
The premise is unjustified.

Q2. Ram asks Walter which team will win the basketball tournament, and Walter says, “Duke, and I can prove it: Duke will score more points than all of its opponents, so Duke will win.” Then Ram asks, “But how do you know that Duke will score more points than its opponents?” Walter answers, “I don’t know. I just hope so.”

View
The premise is unjustified.

Quiz 4: Assuring

Q1. For each of the underlined words or phrases in the following sentences, indicate whether or not it is an assuring term.

I assure you that you can trust my sister.

View
Assuring term

Q2. You certainly can trust my sister.

View
Assuring term

Q3. Imagine that you want to go to a soccer game tonight, so you ask me whether the local team is playing a home game tonight. I respond, “I believe that they are playing a home game tonight.”

View
Not assuring term

Q4. I know that you can trust my sister.

View
Assuring term

Q5. Only an idiot would deny that you can trust my sister.

View
Not assuring term

Quiz 5: Guarding

Q1. For each of the underlined words or phrases in the following sentences, indicate whether or not it is a guarding term.

Some people have raised questions about her program, so we should oppose it.

View
Not guarding term

Q2. Many people agree that her program won’t work, so we should oppose it.

View
Not guarding term

Q3. Her program will lead to many problems, so we should oppose it.

View
Not guarding term

Q4. Her program might lead to problems, so we should oppose it.

View
Not guarding

Q5. I suspect that her program will lead to problems, so we should oppose it.

View
Not guarding term

Quiz 6: Discounting

Q1. For each of the underlined words or phrases in the following sentences, indicate whether or not it is a discounting term.

Although it is raining, I am going for a walk anyway.

View
Discounting term

Q2. I am going for a walk even if it is raining.

View
Discounting term

Q3. It is raining. Still, I am going for a walk.

View
Discounting term

Q4. It is still raining, and I am going for a walk.

View
Not discounting term

Q5. Sure, I will get wet from walking in the rain. I will have fun, nevertheless, and I want to get some exercise.

View
Discounting term

Quiz 7: Evaluation

Q1. Indicate whether the following underlined terms are positively evaluative (E+), negatively evaluative (E–), or not evaluative (N).

Janet is an excellent golfer.

View
E+

Q2. The band was playing very loudly.

View
E+

Q3. The band was playing too loudly.

View
E-

Q4. They turned the right way at the intersection.

View
E+

Q5. They mistakenly turned right at the intersection.

View
E-

Q6. They turned just before the other car.

View
N

Q7. Their punishment was unjust.

View
E-

Quiz 8: Close Analysis (Part II)

Q1. Use the following labels for questions 1-10 to indicate the function of each of the bold words or phrases in this passage from “A Piece of “God’s Handiwork”, by Robert Redford (Paragraph 3).

The BLM says its hands are tied. Why? Because these lands were set aside subject to “valid existing rights,” and Conoco has a lease that gives it the right to drill. Sure Conoco has a lease—more than one, in fact —but those leases were originally issued without sufficient environmental study or public input. As a result, none of them conveyed a valid right to drill. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

The BLM says its hands are tied.

View
C = a conclusion marker

Q2. Because these lands were set aside subject to “valid existing rights,” and Conoco has a lease that gives it the right to drill.

View
P = a premise marker

Q3. Sure Conoco has a lease—more than one, in fact —but those leases were originally issued without sufficient environmental study or public input.

View
P = a premise marker

Q4. Sure Conoco has a lease—more than one, in fact —but those leases were originally issued without sufficient environmental study or public input.

View
N = None of the above

Q5. Sure Conoco has a lease—more than one, in fact —but those leases were originally issued without sufficient environmental study or public input.

View
1.D = a discounting term
2.N = None of the above

Q6. As a result, none of them conveyed a valid right to drill. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

View
1. C = a conclusion marker
2. N = None of the above

Q7. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

View
N = None of the above

Q8. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

View
N = None of the above

Q9. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

View
1.D = a discounting term
2.N = None of the above

Q10. What’s more, in deciding to issue a permit to drill now, the BLM did not conduct a full analysis of the environmental impacts of drilling in these incomparable lands, but instead determined there would be no significant environmental harm on the basis of an abbreviated review that didn’t even look at drilling on the other federal leases.

View
N = None of the above

Quiz 9: More Close Analysis

Q1. Use the following labels for questions 1-10 to indicate the function of each of the bold words or phrases in this passage from “A Piece of “God’s Handiwork”, by Robert Redford (Paragraphs 6-8).What we’re talking about is, in the words of President Clinton, a small piece of “God’s handiwork.” Almost 4 1/2 million acres of irreplaceable red rock wilderness remain outside the monument. Let us at least protect what is within it. The many roadless areas within the monument should remain so—protected as wilderness. The monument’s designation means little if a pattern of exploitation is allowed to continue.Environmentalists—including the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Wilderness Society—appealed BLM’s decision to the Interior Department’s Board of Land Appeals. This appeal, however, was rejected earlier this month. This is a terrible mistake. We shouldn’t be drilling in our national monuments. Period. As President Clinton said when dedicating the new monument, “Sometimes progress is measured in mastering frontiers, but sometimes we must measure progress in protecting frontiers for our children and children to come.”

Allowing drilling to go forward in the Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument would permanently stain what might otherwise have been a defining legacy of the Clinton presidency. Almost 4 1/2 million acres of irreplaceable red rock wilderness remain outside the monument.

View
N = None of the above

Q2. The many roadless areas within the monument should remain so—protected as wilderness.

View
1.P = a premise marker
2.C = a conclusion marker

Q3. The many roadless areas within the monument should remain so—protected as wilderness.

View
N = None of the above

Q4. The monument’s designation means little if a pattern of exploitation is allowed to continue.

View
P = a premise marker

Q5. This appeal, however, was rejected earlier this month.

View
N = None of the above

Q6. This is a terrible mistake.

View
E- = a negative evaluative term

Q7. We shouldn’t be drilling in our national monuments.

View
P = a premise marker

Q8. We shouldn’t be drilling in our national monuments. Period.

View
E- = a negative evaluative term

Q9. As President Clinton said when dedicating the new monument, “Sometimes progress is measured in mastering frontiers, but sometimes we must measure progress in protecting frontiers for our children and children to come.”

View
N = None of the above

Q10. Allowing drilling to go forward in the Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument would permanently stain what might otherwise have been a defining legacy of the Clinton presidency.

View
P = a premise marker

Week 3: Think Again I: How to Understand Arguments Coursera Quiz Answers

Quiz 1:Validity

Q1. Some valid arguments have true premises and a true conclusion.

View
True

Q2. Some valid arguments have true premises and a false conclusion.

View
True

Q3. Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion.

View
True

Q4. Some valid arguments have false premises and a false conclusion.

View
False

Q5. Most professors agree that they are paid too little, so they are.

View
Invalid argument

Q6. Susan is smart and strong, so she is smart.

View
Valid argument

Q7. Sara is either smart or strong, so she is smart.

View
Invalid argument

Q8. Washington is in the United States. I live in Washington. So I live in the United States.

View
Valid argument

Q9. The state of Washington is in the United States. I live in the state of Washington. So I live in the United States.

View
Valid argument

Q10. The state of Washington is in the United Kingdom. I live in the state of Washington. So I live in the United Kingdom.

View
Invalid argument

Q11. There is no largest six-digit number because six-digit numbers are numbers and there is no largest number.

View
Valid argument

Quiz 2: Soundness (Part I)

Q1. Every argument with a true conclusion is sound.

View
False

Q2. Every argument with a false conclusion is unsound.

View
False

Q3. Every argument that is sound has a true conclusion.

View
True

Q4. Every argument that is unsound has a false conclusion.

View
False

Quiz 3: Soundness (Part II)

Q1. For questions 1-3. Assume that the following sentences are either true (T) or false (F) as indicated:

All my children are teenagers. (T)

All teenagers are students. (T)

All teenagers are my children. (F)

All my children are students. (T)

Using these assigned truth values, label each of the following arguments as (a) valid and sound, (b) valid but unsound, (c) invalid but sound, (d) invalid and unsound.

All my children are teenagers.

All teenagers are students.


∴ All my children are students.

View
Valid and sound

Q2. All my children are students.

All teenagers are students.

View
Valid but unsound

∴ All my children are teenagers.

Q3. All teenagers are my children.

All my children are students.


∴ All teenagers are students.

View
Invalid but sound

Quiz 4: Get Down to Basics

Q1. For questions 1-7, indicate whether the underlined words in the following sentences should be removed as excess verbiage when reconstructing the argument.

Philadelphia is rich in history, but it is not now the capital of the United States, so the United States Congress must meet somewhere else.

View
Remove

Q2. Not everybody whom you invited is going to come to your party. Some of them won’t come. So this room should be big enough.

View
Remove

Q3. I know that my wife is at home, since I just called her there and spoke to her. We talked about our dinner plans.

View
Remove

Q4. Some students could not concentrate on the lecture, because they did not eat lunch before class.

View
Remove

Q5. The most surprising news of all is that Johnson dropped out of the race because he thought his opponent was better qualified than he was for the office.

View
Remove

Q6. The challenger in this election is likely to win, since experts agree that more women support him.

View
Do not remove

Q7. Married people are happier, so marriage must be a good thing, or at least I think so.

View
Remove

Quiz 5: Sharpen Edges

Q1. For questions 1-5, indicate whether or not the underlined premise can be broken up into the suggested parts.

James is on the chess and football teams. Football is a team sport. So James plays a team sport.

Can the first premise be broken up into (a) and (b)?

(a) James is on the chess team.

(b) James is on the football team.

(c) Football is a team sport.


∴ (d) James plays a team sport.

View
no

Q2. Mary is either a junior or a senior, so she is almost ready to graduate.

Can this premise be broken up into (a) and (b)?

(a) Mary is a junior.

(b) Mary is a senior.


∴ (c) Mary is almost ready to graduate.

View
yes

Q3. Mercury is the only common metal that is liquid at room temperature, so a pound of mercury would be liquid in this room.

Can this premise be broken up into (a) and (b)?

(a) Mercury is the only common metal.

(b) Mercury is liquid at room temperature.


∴ (c) a pound of mercury would be liquid in this room.

View
no

Q4. Since he won the lottery, he’s rich and lucky, so he’ll probably do well in the stock market, too, unless his luck runs out.

Can this conclusion be broken up into (c) and (d)?

(a) He won the lottery.


∴ (b) He’s rich and lucky.

(c) His luck will not run out.


∴ (d) He’ll probably do well in the stock market.

View
no

Q5. Since many newly emerging nations do not have the capital resources that are necessary for sustained growth, they will continue to need help from industrial nations to avoid mass starvation.

Can this premise be broken up into (a) and (b)?

(a) Adequate capital resources are necessary for sustained growth.

(b) Many newly emerging nations do not have adequate capital resources.


∴ (c) Many newly emerging nations will continue to need help from industrial nations to avoid mass starvation.

View
yes

Quiz 6: Organize Parts

Q1. For each of the following arguments, indicate which of the following arrangements best represents its structure.

ARGUMENT: I know Pat can’t be a father, because she is not a male. So she can’t be a grandfather either.

View
1.Pat can’t be a father, because Pat is not male.
2. Pat can’t be a grandfather. (from 1-2)

Q2. Which kind of structure does the argument in Question 1 have

View
Linear structure

Q3. ARGUMENT: Our team can’t win this Saturday, both because they are no good and also because they are not going to play this Saturday.

View
1.Our team is no good.
2.Our team is not going to play this Saturday. (from 1)
3.Our team can’t win this Saturday. (from 2)

Q4. Which kind of structure does the argument in Question 3 have?

View
Linear structure

Q5. ARGUMENT: Either Jack is a fool or Mary is a crook, because she ended up with all of his money.

View
1.Mary ended up with all of Jack’s money.
2.Either Jack is a fool or Mary is a crook. (from 1)

Q6. Which kind of structure does the argument in Question 5 have?

View
1.Branching structure
2.None of the above

Q7. ARGUMENT: Gold is a metal, so it must conduct electricity, since all metals do.

View
1.Gold is a metal.
2.All metals conduct electricity. (from 1)
3.Gold must conduct electricity. (from 2)

Q8. Which kind of structure does the argument in Question 7 have?

View
Linear structure

Quiz 7: Fill in Gaps

Q1. For each of the following arguments, indicate which of the following claims is the best candidate for a suppressed premise in that argument.

CONTEXT: You and Susan are working on a project together, and she is not pulling her weight.

ARGUMENT: Susan refuses to work on Sundays, which shows that she is lazy and inflexible.

View
Anyone who refuses to work on Sundays is either lazy or inflexible.

Q2. CONTEXT: You are trying to decide whether to visit a sick friend in the hospital.

ARGUMENT: You promised to visit her, so you should visit her.

View
You should keep your promises.

Q3. CONTEXT: We want to figure out whether Mildred is older than the other candidate for a job.

ARGUMENT: Mildred must be over forty-three, since she has a daughter who is thirty-six years old.

View
A person who is not over forty-three cannot have a daughter

Q4. CONTEXT: A boat sank, and authorities have been searching for survivors for over a week.

ARGUMENT: There must not be any survivors, since, if there were any, they would have been found by now.

View
There were no survivors.

Q5. CONTEXT: You are listening to a lecture in a traditional college classroom, but one person in the audience looks older than the rest. Her name is Mary.

ARGUMENT: Mary can’t be a student, because she is a professor, and professors must already have degrees.

View
Students don’t already have degrees.

Quiz 8: Conclude

Q1. If you DO find a reconstruction that is sound, then the conclusion of the argument that you reconstructed is:

View
True

Q2. If you do NOT find a reconstruction that is sound, then the argument that you reconstructed:

View
Is unsound

Q3. If you find a reconstruction that is not sound, then the argument that you reconstructed:

View
Is unsound

Quiz 9: An Example of Reconstruction

Q1. For questions 1-4, each short passage is followed by possible reconstructions of the argument in that passage. Indicate which of the reconstructions best represents the argument in that passage.

His natural talents were not enough; he lost the match because he had not practiced sufficiently. You need either great natural talent or hard work to become a winner.

View
1.His natural talents were not enough
2.He had not practiced sufficiently. (from 1)
3.He lost the match. (from 2)

Q2. I took lots of mathematics, so I know that 81 is not a prime number, because 81 is divisible by 3. Indeed, 81 = 3 to the fourth power. Any idiot knows that.

View
1.81 is divisible by 3.
2.81 is not a prime number. (from 1)

Q3. We really got ripped off by that security company. This burglar alarm won’t work unless we are lucky or the burglar uses the front door, so we can’t count on it. I think we need a new alarm.

View
1.This burglar alarm won’t work unless we are lucky or the burglar uses the front door.
2.We can’t count on being lucky.
3.We can’t count on the burglar using the front doo
4.We can’t count on a burglar alarm that won’t work
5.We can’t count on this burglar alarm. (from 1-4)
6. This burglar alarm is the only one that we have.
7.We need a burglar alarm that we can count on.
8.We need a new burglar alarm. (from 5-7)

Q4. Joe is not a freshman, since he lives in a fraternity, and freshmen are not allowed to live in fraternities. He also can’t be a senior, since he has not declared a major. And he can’t be a junior, because I never met him before today, and I would have met him before now if he were a junior. So Joe must be a sophomore.

View
1.Joe lives in a fraternity.
2.Freshmen are not allowed to live in fraternities.
3.Joe is not a freshman.
4.Joe has not declared a major.
5.Joe is not a senior
6.I never met Joe before today.
7.If Joe were a junior, I would have met him before today.
8.Joe is not a junior.
9.Joe is a sophomore.

Week 4: Think Again I: How to Understand Arguments Coursera Quiz Answers

Quiz 1: Final Quiz

Q1. The goal of an argument is to abuse the audience.

View
False

Q2. All arguments are made up of (or expressed in) language of some kind.

View
True

Q3. Every argument has more than one premise.

View
False

Q4. An argument that is spoken is no good if it is not spoken loudly enough.

View
False

Q5.Arguments are never used for any purpose other than to justify or to explain their

View
False

conclusions.

Q6. Language is arbitrary in some respects.

View
True

Q7. The word “since” is always a premise marker.

View
False

Q8. In the sentence “If I had children who had children who had children who had children who had children, then I would be a great-great-great-grandparent,” the phrase “If … then …” is an argument marker which indicates that the person who says this is arguing for the conclusion that I am a great-great-great-grandparent.

View
False

Q9. The word “too” in “too small” introduces an evaluation.

View
False

Q10. A _ term is used to weaken a claim in order to make it easier to defend against possible criticisms.

View
D = discounting

Q11. A _ term can be either positive or negative.

View
A = assuring

Q12. Indicate the best way to complete the following sentence.

An argument is sound (in the technical sense used in this course) when and only when:

View
the argument is valid and its premises are true.

Q13. Classify the following sentences as N, A, V, or B. In assessing soundness, you may assume commonly known facts.

Mount Everest is taller than Mount Kilimanjaro. Mount Kilimanjaro is taller than every anthill.
Therefore, Mount Everest is taller than any anthill.

View
B = an argument that is both valid and sound

Q14. Classify the following sentence as N, A, V, or B. In assessing soundness, you may assume commonly known facts.

He is so strong that he can lift 100 kilograms.

View
N = not an argument

Q15. Using the following letters for Questions 15-26,

View
D = a discounting term

indicate the main function of the term
or phrase that is CAPITALIZED, BOLDED, and UNDERLINED in the following passage.
More than one letter might be acceptable, but you must choose only one option
as the best.

From Steven Jay Gould: “The Panda’s Thumb”

… The message is paradoxical BUT profound. Orchids manufacture
their intricate devices from the common components of ordinary flowers, parts usually fitted for very different
functions. If God had designed a beautiful
machine to reflect his wisdom and power, surely he would not have used a collection of parts generally
fashioned for other purposes. Orchids were not made by an ideal engineer; they are jury-rigged
from a limited set of available components.

Thus, they must have evolved from ordinary flowers.

Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays: Our textbooks
like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf
by a butterfly or of a poisonous
species by a palatable relative. However,
ideal design is a lousy argument
for evolution, for it mimics the
postulated action of an omnipotent creator. Odd arrangements and funny
solutions are the proof of
evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural
process, constrained by history, follows perforce.

View
D = a discounting term

Q16. This passage is by John Russell:

“There never was a painter like Thomas Eakins, who was born in 1844, died in 1916…. It is not simply that in his hands painting became an exact science, so that if he paints two men rowing on a river, we can tell the month, day, and the hour that they passed UNDER a certain bridge. We admire Eakins for that, but we prize him above all for the new dimension of moral awareness that he brought to American painting.”

View
E+ = a positive evaluative term

Q17.This passage is by John Russell:

“There never was a painter like Thomas Eakins, who was born in 1844, died in
1916…. It is not simply that in his hands painting became an exact science, so that if he paints two men rowing
on a river, we can tell the month, day, and the hour that they passed under a
certain bridge. We admire Eakins for that, BUT
we prize him above all for the new dimension of moral awareness that he brought
to American painting.”

View
G = a guarding term

Q18. This passage is by
John Russell:

“There never was a painter like Thomas Eakins, who was born in 1844, died in
1916…. It is not simply that in his hands painting became an exact science, so that if he paints two men rowing
on a river, we can tell the month, day, and the hour that they passed under a
certain bridge. We admire Eakins for that, but we prize him above all FOR the new dimension of moral
awareness that he brought to American painting.”

View
A = an assuring term

Q19. From Steven Jay Gould: “The
Panda’s Thumb”

… The message is paradoxical but
profound. Orchids manufacture their intricate devices from the common
components of ordinary flowers, parts usually
fitted for very different functions. If God had designed a beautiful machine to reflect his
wisdom and power, surely he
would not have used a collection of parts generally fashioned for other
purposes. Orchids were not made by an IDEAL engineer; they are
jury-rigged from a limited set of available components.

Thus, they must have evolved from ordinary flowers.

Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays: Our textbooks
like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf
by a butterfly or of a poisonous
species by a palatable relative. However,
ideal design is a lousy argument
for evolution, for it mimics the
postulated action of an omnipotent creator. Odd arrangements and funny
solutions are the proof of
evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural
process, constrained by history, follows perforce.

View
A = an assuring term

Q20. From an advertisement for Equal Exchange Coffee (1997):

It may be a little early in the morning to bring this up, but if you buy coffee from large corporations, you are inadvertently maintaining the system which keeps small farmers poor while lining the pockets of rich corporations. By choosing Equal Exchange coffee, you CAN help to make a change. We believe in trading directly with small farming cooperatives at mutually agreed-upon prices with a fixed minimum rate. Then, should the coffee market decline, the farmers are still guaranteed a fair price. So have a cup of Equal Exchange Coffee and make a small farmer happy. Of course, your decision to buy Equal Exchange need not be completely altruistic. For we take as much pride in refining the taste of our gourmet coffees as we do in helping the farmers who produce them….

View
C = a conclusion marker

Q21. This passage is by Paul Davies:

“There is little on the Moon to sustain human life. Mars, however, is a different story. Because of the planet’s relatively benign environment, it is theoretically able to support a permanent human presence. If provided with the right equipment, astronauts would have SOME chance of living there for years. A one-way trip to Mars need not mean a quick demise.”

View
D = a discounting term

Q22. By Ben Selznik:

“The drinking age is not set by the federal government; it is set by the
states. Currently, each state has its law set at 21. However, this figure neither necessarily reflects research and
careful consideration nor appeals to constituents. Instead, it reflects the
fact that drinking age became tied to highway funds somewhere along the way.
Because of this, were a state to lower their drinking age, they would also have
to significantly raise taxes to offset the lost highway funds from the
government. This hand-tying is asinine. if the drinking age is a state DECISION, it should be made by states independently
of funds for highways. Before any progress can be made, lawmakers must sever
this illogical connection.”

View
G = a guarding term

Q23. This passage is by
Paul Davies:

“OBVIOUSLY this strategy carries significant risks in
addition to those faced by a conventional Mars mission. Major equipment failure
could leave the colony without enough power, oxygen or food. An accident might
kill or disable an astronaut who provided some vital expertise. A supply drop
might fail, condemning the colonists to starve in a very public way. Even if
nothing went wrong, the astronauts’ lives would certainly be shortened by the
harsh conditions….”

View
E- = a negative evaluative term

Q24. From an advertisement for Equal Exchange Coffee (1997):

It may be a little early in the morning to bring this up, but if you buy coffee from large corporations, you are inadvertently maintaining the system which keeps small farmers poor while lining the pockets of rich corporations. By choosing Equal Exchange coffee, you can help to make a change. We believe in trading directly with small farming cooperatives at mutually agreed-upon prices with a fixed minimum rate. Then, should the coffee market decline, the farmers are still guaranteed a fair price. So have a cup of Equal Exchange Coffee and make a small farmer happy. OF COURSE, your decision to buy Equal Exchange need not be completely altruistic. For we take as much pride in refining the taste of our gourmet coffees as we do in helping the farmers who produce them….

View
G = a guarding term

Q25. By Ben Selznik:

“A fair portion of drinkers between the ages of 18 and 21 are at colleges where alcohol can be easily obtained.… [C]olleges know full well that underage drinking exists. Students know that they are drinking underage and therefore illegally. And yet, the game continues with colleges trying to make sure that no alcohol-related tragedies occur. This game isn’t the fault of colleges, nor is it the fault of students. Instead, it is the fault of our law, which classifies part of this college-age set as “underage” and the rest as “of age.” When it comes to colleges, our law OBVIOUSLY doesn’t reflect reality. It must therefore be changed.”

View
G = a guarding term

Q26. From Steven Jay Gould: “The Panda’s Thumb”

… The message is paradoxical but profound. Orchids manufacture their intricate devices from the common components of ordinary flowers, parts usually fitted for very different functions. If God had designed a beautiful machine to reflect his wisdom and power, surely he would not have used a collection of parts generally fashioned for other purposes. Orchids were not made by an ideal engineer; they are jury-rigged from a limited set of available components. Thus, they must have evolved from ordinary flowers.

Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays: Our textbooks like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf by a butterfly or of a poisonous species by a palatable relative. However, ideal design is a lousy argument for evolution, for it mimics the postulated action of an omnipotent creator. Odd arrangements and funny solutions are the REASONS to believe in of evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural process, constrained by history, follows perforce.

View
G = a guarding term

Q27. Which of the following sentences could be added as a suppressed premise to make this
argument valid?

All criminals have tattoos, so Gizelle is not a criminal.

View
Most people with tattoos are criminals.

Q28. Which of the following sentences could
be added as a suppressed premise to make this argument valid?

View
Some birds cannot fly.

Pigs cannot fly, so pigs are not birds.

Q29. Indicate which of the
proposed reconstructions best captures the italicized
argument in the following passages from Steven Jay Gould, “The Panda’s
Thumb”:

… The message is paradoxical but profound. Orchids manufacture
their intricate devices from the common components of ordinary flowers, parts usually fitted for very different
functions. If God had designed a beautiful
machine to reflect his wisdom and power, surely he would not have used a collection of parts generally
fashioned for other purposes. Orchids
were not made by an ideal
engineer; [since] they are jury-rigged from a limited set of available
components. Thus, they must have
evolved from ordinary flowers.

Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays: Our textbooks
like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf
by a butterfly or of a poisonous
species by a palatable relative. However,
ideal design is a lousy argument
for evolution, for it mimics the
postulated action of an omnipotent creator. Odd arrangements and funny
solutions are the proof of
evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural
process, constrained by history, follows perforce.

View
1.Orchids were not made by an ideal engineer.
2.Organisms that were not made by an ideal engineer must have evolved from
3.Orchids must have evolved from ordinary flowers. (from 1-2)
4.Orchids are jury-rigged from a limited set of available components.
5.Organisms that are jury-rigged from a limited set of available components must have evolved from ordinary organisms of the same kind.
6. Orchids must have evolved from ordinary flowers. (from 4-5)

Q30. Indicate which of the
proposed reconstructions best represents the italicized argument in the following passage from an advertisement
for Equal Exchange Coffee:

It may be a little early in the morning to bring this up, but if you buy coffee from large
corporations, you are inadvertently maintaining the system which keeps
small farmers poor while lining the pockets of rich corporations. By choosing Equal Exchange coffee, you
can help to make a change. We
believe in trading directly with small farming cooperatives at mutually
agreed-upon prices with a fixed minimum rate. Then, should the coffee market
decline, the farmers are still guaranteed a fair price. So have
a cup of Equal Exchange Coffee and make a small farmer happy. Of course, your decision to buy Equal
Exchange need not be completely altruistic. For we take as much pride in refining the taste of our gourmet
coffees as we do in helping the
farmers who produce them….

View
1.Equal Exchange Coffee company takes as much pride in refining the taste of their gourmet coffees as they do in helping the farmers who produce their gourmet coffees.
2.Equal Exchange Coffee company takes great pride in helping the farmers who produce their gourmet coffees
3.Equal Exchange Coffee company takes great pride in refining the taste of their gourmet coffees. (from 1-2)
4.If Equal Exchange Coffee company takes great pride in refining the taste of their gourmet coffees, then their gourmet coffees will taste good.
5. Equal Exchange gourmet coffees will taste good. (from 3-4)
6.If Equal Exchange gourmet coffees will taste good, then you can make yourself happy by buying Equal Exchange gourmet coffees.
7.You can make yourself happy by buying Equal Exchange gourmet coffees. (from 5-6)
8.If you can make yourself happy by doing something, then your decision to do it need not be completely altruistic.
9.∴ (9) Your decision to buy Equal Exchange need not be completely altruistic. (from 7-8)

Find More Related Quiz Answers >>

Critical Thinking Skills for University Success Coursera Quiz Answers

Solving Problems with Creative and Critical Thinking Quiz Answers

Creative Thinking: Techniques and Tools for Success Coursera Quiz Answers

Team Networking Funda
Team Networking Funda

We are Team Networking Funda, a group of passionate authors and networking enthusiasts committed to sharing our expertise and experiences in networking and team building. With backgrounds in Data Science, Information Technology, Health, and Business Marketing, we bring diverse perspectives and insights to help you navigate the challenges and opportunities of professional networking and teamwork.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *