PHIL 447: Final Exam Answers

1267 Words6 Pages
PHIL 447 Final Exam Answers https://hwguiders.com/downloads/phil-447-final-exam-answers PHIL 447 Final Exam Answers Question 1. (TCOs 3, 6, 7, 9) Here is a passage that contains a rhetorical fallacy. Name that fallacy, and in a paragraph, explain why the argument is irrelevant to the point of the passage. Here is your example for this question: I know I forgot to deposit that check into the bank yesterday. But I can’t do anything that pleases you. I brought you flowers yesterday and you didn’t even put them in water. Question 2. (TCOs 5, 8) In the example below, identify the presumed cause and the presumed effect. Does the example contain or imply a causal claim, a hypothesis, or an explanation that cannot be tested? If it does fall…show more content…
Question 3. (TCOs 2, 4) Explain in what way the thinking of the following statement is wrong or defective. Give reasons for your judgment. There must be something to palm reading. Millions of people believe in it. Question 4. (TCOs 3, 9) Briefly discuss how we look at sample size, sample diversity and bias in evaluating statistical studies. What factors do we look for and what questions do we ask in evaluating these aspects of a statistical study? Question 5. (TCOs 6, 7, 9) Here is a short essay about an investigation. There are also four questions/tasks; write a paragraph to answer each one of them. 1. Identify the causal hypothesis at issue. 2. Identify what kind of investigation it is. 3. There are control and experimental groups. State the difference in effect (or cause) between the control and experimental groups. 4. State the conclusion that you think is warranted by the report. Discuss how size, diversity, facts you know about the make-up of each group, and statistical significance of d factored into reaching your opinion of what conclusion is…show more content…
If a person believes that political doctrines are void of content, that person will be quite content to see political debates go on, but won’t expect anything useful to come from them. If we consider the other case, that there is a patriotic justification for a political belief, then what? If the belief is that a specific political position is true, then one ought to be intolerant of all other political beliefs, since each political “position” must be held to be false relative to the belief one has. And since each political position holds out the promise of reward for any probability of its fixing social problems, however small, that makes it seem rational to choose it over its alternatives. The trouble, of course, is that the people who have other political doctrines may hold theirs just as strongly, making strength of belief itself invalid as a way to determine the rightness of a political
Open Document