100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
PHIL 105 Quiz 4 With Complete Solutions Graded A+ $7.99   Add to cart

Exam (elaborations)

PHIL 105 Quiz 4 With Complete Solutions Graded A+

 0 view  0 purchase
  • Course
  • CGFM - Certified Government Financial Manager
  • Institution
  • CGFM - Certified Government Financial Manager

PHIL 105 Quiz 4 With Complete Solutions Graded A+

Preview 4 out of 42  pages

  • October 1, 2024
  • 42
  • 2024/2025
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers
  • CGFM - Certified Government Financial Manager
  • CGFM - Certified Government Financial Manager
avatar-seller
Denyss
PHIL 105 Quiz 4 With Complete
Solutions Graded A+
[Document subtitle]




[DATE]
[COMPANY NAME]
[Company address]

,An expression is vague if - ANSWERS:there is no precise boundary between the cases
in which it applies and the cases in which it does not apply.

Feedback: The correct answer is B. An expression is vague exactly when it lacks a
precise meaning. A vague expression, in other words, is one without a sharp boundary
between cases in which it applies and cases in which it does not apply. Some standard
examples of vague terms are "bald," "tall," and "heap."

Which of the following expressions is vague? - ANSWERS:hill
The correct answer is E.

Because there is no sharp boundary between things that are hills and things that are not
hills, the term "hill" is vague. To see why the term "hill" is vague, just imagine a series of
lumps on the ground, the first of which is very small, and each subsequent member of
which is slightly larger than the last. At the beginning of the series, the lumps are
definitely not hills. At some later point in the series, however, there are lumps, which
definitely are hills. Yet there is no sharp, precise boundary between the hills and the
non-hills. Between the items that are definitely hills and the items that are definitely not,
there are many borderline cases. For this reason, the term "hill" is vague.

The terms "33," "=," "acceleration," and "mass" are not vague. Either a given number is
33, or else it is not. A number can not be a borderline case of 33; there are not
numbers, which are 33 to various degrees. Likewise for mathematical equality. Either a
pair of terms are equal, or else they are not. There is no such thing as varying degrees
of mathematical equality.

Acceleration and mass, likewise, are non-vague concepts. There are, of course, various
amounts of mass that a body can have, and also various rates of acceleration, but these
facts do not mean that the concepts of mass and acceleration are themselves vague.
From the fact that there are different amounts of mass, in other words, does not mean
that something can have mass to different degrees. Either a thing has mass, or it
doesn't. Having mass is an all-or-nothing affair. The question of how much mass one
has, in other words, is different from the question of whether one has mass at all.

An expression is ambiguous if - ANSWERS:it has two or more distinct meanings.

Feedback: The correct answer is A. An ambiguous expression is one, which has more
than one distinct meaning. If the expression has multiple meanings because a single
word has multiple meanings, then the ambiguity is semantic. If the expression, however,
has multiple meanings because a larger phrase or clause has multiple meanings, then
the ambiguity is syntactic.

Which of the following expressions is semantically ambiguous? - ANSWERS:bank
Feedback:
The correct answer is A.

,The term "bank" is semantically ambiguous. On one hand, the term can refer to the
edge of a river, stream, or body of water. On the other hand, the term can also refer to a
financial institution, which stores wealth.

Which of the following sentences is syntactically ambiguous? - ANSWERS:Close doors
and open windows.
Feedback:
The correct answer is A.

The phrase "close doors and open windows" could mean two different things. On one
hand, it could be a command for people to close doors, and for people to open
windows. On the other hand, it could be a command for people to close two sorts of
things, namely doors and open windows. Because this ambiguity is not the result of a
single term, such as "door," having multiple meanings, the ambiguity is syntactic rather
than semantic.

It is true that the sentence "I need to deposit some money at the bank" is ambiguous,
but its ambiguity is solely due to the semantic ambiguity of the word "bank." Since its
ambiguity depends on the ambiguity of a single term, the sentence "I need to deposit
some money at the bank" is not syntactically ambiguous. It is only semantically
ambiguous.

An ad hominem argument is one in which the premises are about - ANSWERS:the
person making a point and the conclusion tells against their making that point.


Feedback:
The correct answer is A.

An ad hominem argument is one, whose premises are about the person or persons who
make a certain point, and whose conclusion tells against that point. We saw that there
were three kinds of ad hominem arguments: deniers, which state that the given
conclusion is false; silencers, which state that someone has no right, or no permission,
to make the given conclusion; and dismissers, which state that someone does not have
the evidence or justification to make the given conclusion.

Which of the following arguments is an ad hominem? - ANSWERS:Lying Larry told me
that it will rain today, therefore, it probably will not rain today.

Feedback: The correct answer is B.

Because it begins with a premise about a person, and draws a conclusion that rejects
that person's testimony, the argument in (b) is an ad hominem argument.

None of the arguments in (a), (c), and (d) are ad hominems, since none of them reject
the conclusion of the person they mention. Finally, (e) is not an ad hominem because it

, does not conclude that Sam's testimony is false from Sam's screaming. (e) does not
include the word "therefore," in other words.

An appeal to authority occurs when the premises are about - ANSWERS:the person
making a point and the conclusion tells in favor of their making that point.

The correct answer is B.

An appeal to authority is an argument, which supports an argument's conclusion on the
basis of something about the person making the argument. We have seen three
different kinds of arguments from authority: affirmers, which state that the given
conclusion is true; amplifiers, which state that someone has a special right, or special
permission, to make the given conclusion; and supporters, which state that someone
does has particularly good evidence or justification to make the given conclusion.

Which of the following arguments is an appeal to authority? - ANSWERS:Honest Abe
told me that it will rain today, therefore, it will probably rain today.

Feedback: The correct answer is A.

Because it begins with a premise about a person, and draws a conclusion that supports
that person's point, the argument in (a) is an argument from authority.
None of the arguments in (b), (c), (d), or (e) are arguments from authority, since none of
them support the point of the person they mention.

A silencer is an argument in which the premises are about the person making a point,
and the conclusion is that - ANSWERS:they are not entitled to make that point in the
context in which they did, so you should not listen to them.

Feedback: The correct answer is A. Silencer arguments are arguments, which state that
a certain person does not have the right, or the permission, to offer the testimony that
she offers

An amplifier is an argument in which the premises are about the person making a point,
and the conclusion is that - ANSWERS:they are especially entitled to make that point in
the context in which they did, so you should pay special attention to them.

Feedback:
The correct answer is D.

An amplifier argument is one, which states that someone has a special right, or special
permission, to make the argument that they are making. If one points to the fact that
Ulrich is the assigned umpire for a baseball game, for instance, and if one also points
out that assigned umpires have a special right to offer opinions about the game, then,
by concluding that Ulrich's testimony is good, one makes an amplifier argument from
Ulrich's authority.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Denyss. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $7.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

75057 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$7.99
  • (0)
  Add to cart