Valid Vs Invalid Arguments 2.3 Quiz Test
(249).jpg "Valid Vs Invalid Arguments 2.3 Quiz Test - Quiz")
Put your logical thinking skills to the test with our captivating "Valid or Invalid Argument" quiz. Are you ready to analyze statements, dissect reasoning, and determine logical validity? This thought-provoking quiz presents a series of statements, each with its own argumentative structure. Your task is to discern whether these arguments are valid or invalid based on their logical coherence and adherence to fundamental principles of reasoning.
With each question, you'll be challenged to evaluate the strength of the argument and make a sound judgment. Sharpen your mind, enhance your critical thinking abilities, and see how well you can Read moredifferentiate between valid and invalid arguments. Get ready for a mind-bending adventure that will leave you questioning everything you thought you knew about reasoning. Begin the "Valid or Invalid Argument" quiz and discover how skilled you are at unraveling the complexities of logical argumentation.
- 1.
As the term is defined, it makes no sense to describe an individual claim as “valid” or “invalid.”
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
True. As we've defined it, validity is a property of whole arguments, not of individual claims.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
An argument can have invalid logic but still qualify as a “good” argument.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
True. We'll see more examples in the next section.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
If an argument is valid, then by definition, it’s a good argument.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
False. A valid argument satisfies the Logic Condition, but it remains to be seen whether it also satisfies the Truth Condition. Good arguments must satisfy both.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
1. All dogs bark. 2. Charlie is a dog. Therefore, Charlie barks.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
A. ValidExplanation
False. Lots of animals bark, like wolves, coyotes and seals. People can even bark. The conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
1. Almost all dogs can play the piano. 2. Charlie is a dog. Therefore, Charlie can play the piano.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
B. InvalidExplanation
Invalid, but not because the first premise is false. It's invalid because the premises don't guarantee the truth of the condition.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
1. All dogs bark. 2. Charlie barks. Therefore, Charlie is a dog.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
B. InvalidExplanation
False. Lots of animals bark. People can bark. The conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
1. If there is no gas in the car, then it won’t start. 2. The car started. Therefore, there is gas in the car.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
A. ValidExplanation
Valid. These aren't always easy to see. In this case, it's helpful to be familiar with some of the common valid and invalid argument forms associated with conditional arguments. This is an instance of a valid argument form: If A, then B, not B, therefore, not-A. In this case, if the car started, but there was no gas in the car, it would contradict the first premise. That first premise guarantees that if the car starts, there's gas in the car.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
1. The card you picked is either a Jack, a Queen, or a King. 2. The card you picked is not a Jack. Therefore, the card you picked is either a Queen or a King.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
A. ValidExplanation
Valid. If the card you picked is not a Jack, but the only options were Jack, Queen and King, the card you chose must be either a Queen or a King.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
1. Successful candidates for this job must have either a Master’s degree or five years of work experience. 2. Johnny has a Master’s degree. 3. Johnny got the job. Therefore, Johnny does not have five years of work experience.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
B. InvalidExplanation
Invalid. We saw an example like this earlier. Having a Master's degree and having five years of work experience are not mutually exclusive. It is possible Johnny had a Master’s degree and not five years of experience, but still got the job.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
1. My teacher Mr. Hill is a jackass. 2. All jackasses have long ears. Therefore, my teacher Mr. Hill has long ears.
- A.
Valid
- B.
Invalid
Correct Answer
B. InvalidExplanation
Invalid. If the meaning of "jackass" was the SAME on both premises, then it would be valid. But clearly, we're using the term in two different senses in each of the premises. In the first premise, we're using jackass metaphorically as an insult. In the second premise, we're using it literally to refer to a type of animal with long ears. Since these terms no longer refer to the same thing, the logic is broken, and the conclusion doesn't follow. Arguments like this commit the fallacy known as "equivocation," which involves using the same term with two different meanings in an argument. Here we'd say that this argument "equivocates on the meaning of jackass."Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
May 06, 2024Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team
Expert Reviewed by
Juliette Firla -
Aug 24, 2012Quiz Created by
Kdelapla