Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265)
Access The Exact Questions for Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265)
💯 100% Pass Rate guaranteed
🗓️ Unlock for 1 Month
Rated 4.8/5 from over 1000+ reviews
- Unlimited Exact Practice Test Questions
- Trusted By 200 Million Students and Professors
What’s Included:
- Unlock Actual Exam Questions and Answers for Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265) on monthly basis
- Well-structured questions covering all topics, accompanied by organized images.
- Learn from mistakes with detailed answer explanations.
- Easy To understand explanations for all students.
Your Complete Learning Package: Activated Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265) : Practice Questions & Answers
Free Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265) Questions
Which sentences are arguments
-
We know the student cheated on the exam because the instructor caught the student stealing glances at their neighbor's test.
-
The student only cheated on the exam because their financial aid depended on it
-
No one has ever been to the moon, so we do not know that it is not made of cheese
-
If you suspect you have been infected with rabies, then you should contact a medical professional immediately
Explanation
Correct answers:
A. We know the student cheated on the exam because the instructor caught the student stealing glances at their neighbor's test,
C. No one has ever been to the moon, so we do not know that it is not made of cheese.
Explanation:
An argument presents a premise that supports a conclusion. In sentence A, the premise ("the instructor caught the student stealing glances at their neighbor's test") leads to the conclusion that "the student cheated on the exam."
In sentence C, the premise ("no one has ever been to the moon") leads to the conclusion that "we do not know that it is not made of cheese."
Why the other options are wrong:
B. The statement presents a reason for cheating but lacks a clear conclusion.
D. This is not an argument, but rather an instruction or recommendation without supporting reasoning.
A student sends the following email to an instructor:
Subject:
Hey- Having trouble with the homework due to health issues. need to meet as soon as possible.
Which strategy can help the student improve this email
-
Using more uppercase letters
-
Divulging personal health information
-
Expanding the message to four paragraphs
-
Including a subject line to summarize the email
Explanation
Correct answer:
d. Including a subject line to summarize the email
Explanation:
Including a subject line helps the instructor quickly understand the purpose of the email, which makes it easier for the instructor to prioritize and respond promptly. A clear and concise subject line is key in professional communication.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Using more uppercase letters: Writing in uppercase letters can come across as shouting and unprofessional. It's better to use standard capitalization.
b. Divulging personal health information: While the student's health issue is relevant, it is better to keep the details minimal and professional, avoiding over-sharing personal health information.
c. Expanding the message to four paragraphs: The message should be concise and to the point. Expanding it unnecessarily may make it harder for the instructor to quickly assess the issue and provide a response
If I am bald, then I am old. I am old. Therefore, I am bald
-
Begging the question
-
The fallacy fallacy
-
Denying the antecedent
-
Affirming the consequent
Explanation
Correct answer:
D.) Affirming the consequent
Explanation:
This is an example of the affirming the consequent fallacy. In this logical error, the argument assumes that because the consequent (being old) is true, the antecedent (being bald) must also be true. The structure of this fallacy is as follows:
If A, then B.
B is true.
Therefore, A must be true.
This is flawed because B being true does not necessarily mean that A is the cause of B. There could be other reasons for B to be true.
Why the other options are wrong:
A.) Begging the question: This fallacy involves assuming the truth of the conclusion within the premises, essentially arguing in a circle. This is not what happens in this argument.
B.) The fallacy fallacy: This refers to rejecting an argument just because it contains a fallacy, even if the conclusion might be correct. This is not relevant to the argument presented.
C.) Denying the antecedent: This fallacy occurs when the argument incorrectly assumes that if the antecedent is false, the consequent must also be false. This is not the case here, where the consequent is true but does not guarantee the antecedent.
A student studies two hours a day for a course but has failed a major test. Which approach can help the student achieve academic success
-
Increasing study time to six hours a day
-
Asking the instructor for study advice
-
Ignoring the clock while taking the test
-
Leaving difficult test questions blank
Explanation
Correct answer:
b. Asking the instructor for study advice
Explanation:
Asking the instructor for advice can help the student identify the areas where they need to focus, and may uncover study techniques or resources that were not previously considered.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Increasing study time to six hours a day: Simply increasing study time without improving study methods or addressing weak areas may not result in success.
c. Ignoring the clock while taking the test: Not managing time during the test can result in incomplete answers, reducing the overall score.
d. Leaving difficult test questions blank: Leaving questions blank limits the opportunity to earn points, even if the answer is partially correct.
Which argument is inductive
-
All cubes have six sides. This die is a cube. Hence, this die has six sides.
-
No magical creatures exist. Unicorns are magical creatures. Therefore, unicorns do not exist.
-
Because most penguins are from areas with cold climates, it is probable that the penguin you saw at the zoo was from an area with a cold climate
-
If the egg fell, then it broke. The egg did not break. So, the egg did not fall.
Explanation
Correct Answer:
C.) Because most penguins are from areas with cold climates, it is probable that the penguin you saw at the zoo was from an area with a cold climate.
Explanation:
This is an inductive argument. Inductive reasoning involves making generalizations based on observations or patterns, but the conclusion is not guaranteed — it is likely but not certain. The argument infers that since most penguins live in cold climates, it is probable that the penguin at the zoo also came from a cold climate, though it's not certain.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong:
A.) All cubes have six sides. This die is a cube. Hence, this die has six sides.
Why it’s wrong: This is a deductive argument. The conclusion is guaranteed to be true based on the premises. If all cubes have six sides and the die is a cube, it must have six sides. Deductive arguments are meant to provide conclusions that are certain, not probable.
B.) No magical creatures exist. Unicorns are magical creatures. Therefore, unicorns do not exist.
Why it’s wrong: This is a deductive argument. The reasoning follows necessarily from the premises. If no magical creatures exist and unicorns are magical, then unicorns do not exist. Deductive arguments draw conclusions that are logically certain when the premises are true.
D.) If the egg fell, then it broke. The egg did not break. So, the egg did not fall.
Why it’s wrong: This is a deductive argument based on the principle of modus tollens. The argument states that if "If A, then B" is true, and B is false (the egg did not break), then A must also be false (the egg did not fall). Deductive reasoning provides conclusions that follow logically from the premises, so the conclusion here is necessary rather than probable.
Which is a simple proposition that is expressed in the above paragraph
-
Many people are not sure where they can go to get care.
-
The U.S. healthcare system is difficult to navigate, and this negatively affects many of us
-
What can be done to improve this
-
Many people are unsure exactly how their health insurance coverage works and are not sure where they can go to get care
Explanation
Correct answer:
A. Many people are not sure where they can go to get care.
Explanation:
A simple proposition is a declarative sentence that expresses a single, verifiable idea that can be judged as either true or false. "Many people are not sure where they can go to get care" is a straightforward statement that can be evaluated for truth, making it a simple proposition.
Why the other options are wrong:
B. This is a complex proposition, as it combines two ideas with "and." It cannot be evaluated as a single true or false statement because it contains two different assertions.
C. This is a question, and questions are not propositions, as they cannot be evaluated as true or false.
D. This is also a complex proposition because it includes two clauses connected by "and," making it more than a simple, single assertion.
The Bright Tooth toothpaste company runs the following advertisement: "Use Bright Tooth toothpaste. Nine out of ten dentists recommend it!" You decide to research this claim. You discover that the Bright Tooth toothpaste company surveyed only ten carefully selected dentists, nine of whom expressed support for Bright Tooth toothpaste. You also learn that, as of 2019, there were 200,419 dentists in the United States alone. Which error is committed in the advertisement
-
Selection bias
-
Thinking slow
-
Selective attention
-
Unfair stereotype
Explanation
Correct Answer:
A.) Selection bias
Explanation:
Selection bias occurs when a sample is not representative of the population as a whole. In this case, the toothpaste company surveyed only ten carefully selected dentists, which is a very small and unrepresentative sample compared to the full population of dentists in the U.S.
Why the other options are wrong:
B.) Thinking slow:
This refers to the concept of deliberate, slow thinking (system 2 thinking) in contrast to quick, automatic thinking (system 1), but it is not the core error in this case.
C.) Selective attention:
This refers to the tendency to focus on certain pieces of information while ignoring others. The error here is more about biased sample selection rather than attention to information.
D.) Unfair stereotype:
An unfair stereotype involves generalized beliefs about a group that may not be accurate, but this does not directly apply to the error in the advertisement, which is about the biased selection of the survey sample.
A report concludes that people who drive red cars get more speeding tickets than people who drive other color cars. Based on this report, an individual concludes that red cars encourage people to drive fast.
Which concept does this conclusion illustrate
-
The principle of charity
-
Anchoring
-
Selection bias
-
Representativeness
Explanation
Correct Answer:
D.) Representativeness
Explanation:
The conclusion assumes that there is a causal relationship between the color of a car and driving behavior. This is an example of the representativeness heuristic, where people mistakenly associate certain characteristics (like a car's color) with specific behaviors (like speeding). In reality, other factors—such as personality traits of drivers who prefer red cars or increased visibility to law enforcement—could explain the pattern.
Why the other options are wrong:
A.) The principle of charity: This principle involves interpreting others’ arguments in the strongest possible way before criticizing them. It is unrelated to this situation, which involves an incorrect causal assumption.
B.) Anchoring: Anchoring is when someone relies too heavily on the first piece of information they receive when making a judgment. This situation does not involve an initial value affecting the conclusion.
C.) Selection bias: Selection bias occurs when the sample used in a study is not representative of the broader population. While the report may have flaws, the individual's conclusion is based on a faulty causal assumption, not an issue of biased sampling.
All Texans are Americans. Ana is an American. Therefore, Ana is a Texan. Which terms categorize this deductive argument
-
Valid
-
Invalid
-
Sound
Explanation
Correct answer:
a. Valid;
d. Unsound
Explanation:
The argument is valid because, in the form of a deductive syllogism, if all Texans are Americans and Ana is an American, it doesn't logically follow that Ana must be a Texan. The structure of the argument is valid, even though the conclusion is incorrect due to incorrect premises. The argument is unsound because, although it is valid, it is not based on true premises. The premise "All Texans are Americans" is true, but the argument mistakenly assumes that all Americans are Texans, which is false. Thus, the argument is unsound.
Why the other options are wrong:
b. Invalid: This is incorrect because the argument is valid in form. The premises do not lead to a logically guaranteed conclusion, but the structure itself is valid.
c. Sound: This is incorrect because, for an argument to be sound, the premises must be true, and in this case, the argument relies on a false premise that all Americans are Texans. Therefore, it is not sound.
Complete the statement: A formal fallacy is a type of
-
Good structure
-
Good statement
-
Bad argument structure
-
Bad statement
Explanation
Correct answer:
c. Bad argument structure
Explanation:
A formal fallacy occurs when there is a flaw in the logical structure of the argument, making the reasoning invalid. It is specifically related to the form of the argument, not the content.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Good structure: This is incorrect because a formal fallacy involves a bad or invalid structure, not a good one.
b. Good statement: This is incorrect because a formal fallacy concerns the structure of an argument, not the quality of individual statements.
d. Bad statement: This is incorrect because a formal fallacy refers to structural issues in the argument, not the truth or falsity of specific statements.
How to Order
Select Your Exam
Click on your desired exam to open its dedicated page with resources like practice questions, flashcards, and study guides.Choose what to focus on, Your selected exam is saved for quick access Once you log in.
Subscribe
Hit the Subscribe button on the platform. With your subscription, you will enjoy unlimited access to all practice questions and resources for a full 1-month period. After the month has elapsed, you can choose to resubscribe to continue benefiting from our comprehensive exam preparation tools and resources.
Pay and unlock the practice Questions
Once your payment is processed, you’ll immediately unlock access to all practice questions tailored to your selected exam for 1 month .
Frequently Asked Question
These questions are designed to help students improve their critical thinking skills by evaluating arguments, identifying logical fallacies, and assessing the quality of evidence. They align with PHIL 1020 D265 Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence.
The questions focus on: Logical fallacies (e.g., appeal to authority, circular reasoning, false cause) Evaluating evidence and reasoning Distinguishing between correlation and causation Identifying weak vs. strong arguments
Students taking PHIL 1020 D265 or anyone interested in improving their reasoning, argument analysis, and critical thinking skills.
These questions help students recognize flawed reasoning, construct stronger arguments, and develop analytical skills essential for academic success in philosophy, law, business, and other disciplines.
New questions are regularly generated to provide fresh challenges and cover different aspects of reasoning and argument evaluation.
You can find additional critical thinking practice questions on ulosca.com, where curated exam prep resources are available.