Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265)
Sharpen your reasoning skills with 200+ real D265 practice questions and detailed, step-by-step explanations tailored for exam success.
- Covers key concepts like argument analysis, logic, bias, and evidence evaluation
- Exam-style questions to build confidence and critical thinking precision
- Clear explanations that strengthen your understanding
- Unlimited access for just $30/month — flexible, affordable, effective
Join students across the country using Ulosca to pass D265 faster and think more critically.
Start now at Ulosca where better thinking begins.
Rated 4.8/5 from over 1000+ reviews
- Unlimited Exact Practice Test Questions
- Trusted By 200 Million Students and Professors
What’s Included:
- Unlock 100 + 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.
Free Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence (D265) Questions
A new student has difficulty with time management in school due to a fear of letting others down. This leads to hours spent on school projects leaving little time for personal activities. Which emotional block to time management applies to this student's situation
-
Perfectionism
-
Anxiety
-
Guilt
-
Resentment
Explanation
Correct answer:
c. Guilt
Explanation:
The student's fear of letting others down and spending excessive time on school projects points to guilt, as they are likely feeling responsible for others' expectations, which causes them to prioritize work over personal activities.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Perfectionism: While perfectionism can lead to spending too much time on tasks, this situation seems more focused on emotional pressure from others, not the need for perfection.
b. Anxiety: Anxiety may contribute to stress, but in this case, the root emotion is guilt for potentially disappointing others.
d. Resentment: Resentment typically arises from feeling unfairly treated or unappreciated, which is not the primary issue in this situation.
Consider the following argument:
A pen is a writing utensil. Sometimes, animals are kept in a pen. Thus, sometimes, animals are kept in a writing utensil.
What fallacy is found in this argument
-
The fallacy of equivocation
-
The fallacy of begging the question
-
The fallacy of sweeping generalization
-
The appeal to popularity fallacy
Explanation
Correct Answer:
A.) The fallacy of equivocation
Explanation:
The fallacy of equivocation occurs when a word is used with different meanings in an argument, which causes confusion. In this case, the word "pen" is used with two different meanings: one as a writing utensil and the other as an enclosure for animals. The argument misleadingly shifts between these meanings to create a false conclusion.
Why the other options are wrong:
B.) The fallacy of begging the question: This fallacy occurs when the argument assumes the truth of the very thing it is trying to prove, which isn't the case here.
C.) The fallacy of sweeping generalization: This fallacy happens when a general rule is applied too broadly, but that is not what happens in this case.
D.) The appeal to popularity fallacy: This fallacy happens when something is deemed true because many people believe it, which is not relevant to the argument presented here.
A young person is wearing a tie-dyed shirt and driving a Volkswagen (VW) bus. Based on this, another individual concludes that this person has liberal political views.
Which bias does this reasoning reflect
-
Availability bias
-
Anchoring and adjustment bias
-
Confirmation bias
-
Representativeness bias
Explanation
Correct Answer:
D.) Representativeness bias
Explanation:
Representativeness bias occurs when people judge the probability of something based on how well it fits a stereotype rather than considering actual statistical likelihood. In this case, the individual assumes that wearing a tie-dyed shirt and driving a VW bus means the young person must have liberal political views, even though these traits do not necessarily determine political beliefs.
Why the other options are wrong:
A.) Availability bias: This bias happens when people judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily they can recall similar examples. The conclusion here is based on stereotypes, not personal recall of past instances.
B.) Anchoring and adjustment bias: This bias occurs when someone relies too heavily on an initial piece of information (the "anchor") and fails to adjust their thinking sufficiently. There is no clear "anchor" being used in this reasoning.
C.) Confirmation bias: Confirmation bias happens when people favor information that supports their existing beliefs and ignore contrary evidence. In this case, the person is making an assumption rather than selectively interpreting evidence to confirm a pre-existing belief.
When asked how likely it is for an urban cyclist to get in an accident, a survey respondent remembered that their friend got into a cycling accident last week. This makes them conclude that cycling accidents are fairly likely. Which statement is correct about the source of bias in the passage and how to avoid its impact
-
This is availability bias. It is best avoided by carefully considering whether the examples that come to mind are truly representative of the world at large.
-
This is confirmation bias. It is best avoided by seeking out the best arguments for alternative viewpoints
-
This is availability bias. It is best avoided by going with one's instincts and avoiding too much deliberation
-
This is confirmation bias. It is best avoided by staying fixed in one's beliefs and not allowing outside influences to change one's views
Explanation
Correct Answer:
A.) This is availability bias. It is best avoided by carefully considering whether the examples that come to mind are truly representative of the world at large.
Explanation:
The bias here is availability bias, where the respondent overestimates the likelihood of an event based on the ease with which they recall similar instances (in this case, the friend's cycling accident). To avoid this bias, one should assess whether these instances are representative or if they are outliers.Why the other options are wrong:
B.) This is confirmation bias. It is best avoided by seeking out the best arguments for alternative viewpoints:
Confirmation bias involves seeking information that confirms one's existing beliefs. It’s not the source of the bias in this scenario, where the person is influenced by readily available memories.
C.) This is availability bias. It is best avoided by going with one's instincts and avoiding too much deliberation:
Avoiding deliberation makes the bias worse, not better. Careful consideration is needed to avoid relying on biased examples.
D.) This is confirmation bias. It is best avoided by staying fixed in one's beliefs and not allowing outside influences to change one's views:
This advice would only exacerbate the situation by reinforcing biased thinking and not considering the broader evidence.
If I am a soldier, then I am brave. I am not a soldier. Therefore, I am not brave.
-
Affirming the consequent
-
Denying the antecedent
-
Begging the question
-
The fallacy fallacy
Explanation
Correct answer:
B.) Denying the antecedent
Explanation:
This is an example of the denying the antecedent fallacy. In this type of fallacy, the argument assumes that if the antecedent (being a soldier) is false, then the consequent (being brave) must also be false. The argument takes the form:
If A, then B.
Not A.
Therefore, not B.
This is a logical error because there could be other reasons for someone to be brave that do not depend on being a soldier.
Why the other options are wrong:
A.) Affirming the consequent: This fallacy involves assuming that if the consequent is true, the antecedent must be true as well. This is the opposite of the error in the given argument.
C.) Begging the question: This fallacy involves assuming the truth of the conclusion within the premises. This argument does not do that, so it's not an example of begging the question.
D.) The fallacy fallacy: This refers to rejecting an argument solely because it contains a fallacy, even if the conclusion may be correct. This is not the error in the argument presented.
Which strategy helps students improve retention from a textbook to study for an exam
-
Survey assigned material before an exam
-
Read assigned material at least five times
-
Highlight complete sentences while reading
-
Annotate details with different colors while reading
Explanation
Correct answer:
a. Survey assigned material before an exam
Explanation:
Surveying the material involves skimming through headings, subheadings, and summary sections before diving into a detailed study, which helps with retention and understanding of the material.
Why the other options are wrong:
b. Read assigned material at least five times: Repetition can help, but it’s not as effective as surveying the material first. Re-reading without an initial survey may lead to ineffective studying.
c. Highlight complete sentences while reading: Highlighting full sentences can be ineffective if overdone; it doesn’t promote active learning or deep understanding.
d. Annotate details with different colors while reading: Color-coded annotations can be helpful, but they are not as efficient for retention compared to a strategy of surveying the material first.
In the past, it has snowed in Miami, Florida every summer. Therefore, it will probably snow in Miami next summer. Which terms categorize this inductive argument
-
Strong
-
Weak
-
Cogent
-
Uncogent
Explanation
Correct Answer:
B.) Weak
D.) Uncogent
Explanation:
This is an inductive argument that generalizes based on past occurrences. However, the argument is weak and uncogent because the premise (it has snowed in Miami every summer) is highly unlikely, given Miami’s tropical climate. Therefore, the conclusion (it will probably snow in Miami next summer) does not have strong support. In order to be cogent, an inductive argument must have a strong likelihood of the conclusion being true, but in this case, it does not meet that criterion.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong:
A.) Strong: The argument is not strong because the premises (snowing in Miami every summer) are highly improbable in the context of Miami's climate. Therefore, the argument does not provide strong support for the conclusion.
C.) Cogent: A cogent argument is one that is both strong and has premises that are likely true. Since the premises are highly improbable (snow in Miami every summer), the argument cannot be considered cogent.
Which strategy helps to reduce test anxiety during an exam
-
Cramming the night before the test
-
Staying in the same position during the test
-
Using flashcards to study
-
Taking several long, deep breaths
Explanation
Correct answer:
d. Taking several long, deep breaths
Explanation:
Deep breathing helps to relax the body, reduce stress, and improve focus during the test, making it easier to manage anxiety and perform better.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Cramming the night before the test: Cramming increases stress and is not an effective way to retain information, often leading to more anxiety.
b. Staying in the same position during the test: This doesn’t address anxiety directly. Movement or a change in posture can sometimes help reduce physical tension.
c. Using flashcards to study: While flashcards are a good study tool, they do not specifically address anxiety during the exam itself.
What is a strategy for taking better notes during a fast-paced lecture
-
Recopying notes several times
-
Paraphrasing lecture content by using abbreviations
-
Sitting in the back of the classroom
-
Taking notes directly in the textbook
Explanation
Correct answer:
b. Paraphrasing lecture content by using abbreviations
Explanation:
Paraphrasing and using abbreviations during a fast-paced lecture allows students to capture key information quickly without missing important points.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Recopying notes several times: Recopying notes doesn't contribute much to understanding the material or improving retention. It’s more efficient to actively engage during the lecture.
c. Sitting in the back of the classroom: Sitting in the back can make it harder to stay focused and engage with the lecturer. It's usually better to sit near the front.
d. Taking notes directly in the textbook: Taking notes in the textbook may limit the ability to review or reorganize the material later. It's better to take notes separately for easier reference.
In deductive reasoning, what is the difference between validity and soundness
-
Validity concerns the truth of an argument's premises, but soundness requires a high degree of probability
-
Validity only concerns the structure of an argument, but soundness requires both validity and true premises
-
Validity concerns an argument's probability, but soundness requires clearly defined terms.
-
Validity concerns the inductive strength of an argument, but soundness requires both strength and plausible premises
Explanation
Correct answer:
b. Validity only concerns the structure of an argument, but soundness requires both validity and true premises.
Explanation:
Validity refers to the structure or form of an argument, meaning if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Soundness, however, requires both the argument to be valid and the premises to actually be true.
Why the other options are wrong:
a. Validity concerns the truth of an argument's premises, but soundness requires a high degree of probability: This is incorrect because validity only concerns the structure, not the truth of the premises. Soundness requires the premises to be true, not just a probability.
c. Validity concerns an argument's probability, but soundness requires clearly defined terms: This is incorrect because validity doesn’t concern probability. It’s about whether the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
d. Validity concerns the inductive strength of an argument, but soundness requires both strength and plausible premises: This is incorrect because validity pertains to deductive reasoning, not inductive strength. It focuses on the structure, not the strength or plausibility of the premises.
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 .
PHIL 1020 D265 Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence
1. Introduction to Critical Thinking
Definition:
Critical thinking is the systematic evaluation of ideas, arguments, or claims using reason and evidence. It involves analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information to make informed decisions or judgments.
Key Components:
- Reason: The ability to think logically and draw conclusions.
- Evidence: Facts, data, or information used to support or refute a claim.
Example:
If someone claims, "Eating chocolate improves memory," a critical thinker would ask:
- What evidence supports this claim?
- Are there studies or data to back it up?
- Are there alternative explanations?
2. The Structure of Arguments
Definition:
An argument consists of premises (reasons or evidence) that support a conclusion.
Components:
- Premises: Statements that provide reasons or evidence.
- Conclusion: The statement that the premises support.
Example:
- Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
- Premise 2: Socrates is a human.
- Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
Types of Arguments:
- Deductive: Conclusions necessarily follow from premises (e.g., the Socrates example).
- Inductive: Conclusions are probable based on premises (e.g., "Most birds can fly; therefore, this bird can probably fly").
3. Evaluating Arguments
Steps to Evaluate an Argument:
- Identify the Conclusion: What is the main claim?
- Identify the Premises: What evidence or reasons are provided?
- Assess the Strength of the Premises: Are they true, relevant, and sufficient?
- Determine the Logical Connection: Do the premises support the conclusion?
Example:
Claim: "We should ban plastic bags because they harm the environment."
- Premise 1: Plastic bags take hundreds of years to decompose.
- Premise 2: Plastic bags pollute oceans and harm marine life.
- Conclusion: Banning plastic bags will reduce environmental harm.
Evaluation:
- Premises are true and relevant.
- The conclusion logically follows from the premises.
4. Logical Fallacies
Definition:
Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that weaken an argument.
Common Fallacies:
- Ad Hominem: Attacking the person instead of the argument (e.g., "You're wrong because you're not an expert").
- Straw Man: Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack (e.g., "You think we should do nothing about climate change").
- False Dilemma: Presenting only two options when more exist (e.g., "You're either with us or against us").
- Circular Reasoning: Using the conclusion as a premise (e.g., "The Bible is true because it says so").
Example:
- Fallacy: "You can't trust John's opinion on climate change because he's not a scientist."
- Why it's flawed: It commits an ad hominem fallacy by attacking John instead of addressing his argument.
5. Types of Evidence
Definition:
Evidence is information used to support or refute a claim.
Types of Evidence:
- Empirical Evidence: Based on observation or experimentation (e.g., scientific studies).
- Anecdotal Evidence: Based on personal stories or examples (e.g., "My friend quit smoking using this method").
- Statistical Evidence: Based on numerical data (e.g., "70% of people prefer X over Y").
- Expert Testimony: Opinions or conclusions from experts in a field.
Example:
Claim: "Vaccines are safe and effective."
- Empirical Evidence: Clinical trials showing vaccine efficacy.
- Statistical Evidence: Data showing reduced disease rates in vaccinated populations.
- Expert Testimony: Statements from medical professionals.
6. Cognitive Biases
Definition:
Cognitive biases are systematic errors in thinking that affect judgment and decision-making.
Common Biases:
- Confirmation Bias: Favoring information that confirms preexisting beliefs.
- Availability Heuristic: Overestimating the importance of information that is readily available.
- Anchoring Bias: Relying too heavily on the first piece of information encountered.
Example:
- Confirmation Bias: A person who believes in astrology only remembers the times a horoscope was accurate and ignores inaccuracies.
7. Argument Analysis and Construction
Steps to Construct a Strong Argument:
- Define the Issue: Clearly state the problem or question.
- Gather Evidence: Collect relevant and reliable information.
- Organize Premises: Arrange evidence logically to support the conclusion.
- Anticipate Counterarguments: Address potential objections.
Example:
Issue: Should schools implement uniforms?
- Premise 1: Uniforms reduce distractions and improve focus.
- Premise 2: Uniforms promote equality among students.
- Counterargument: Uniforms limit self-expression.
- Rebuttal: Self-expression can be encouraged in other ways, such as extracurricular activities.
8. Practical Applications of Critical Thinking
In Everyday Life:
- Evaluating news sources for bias.
- Making informed decisions about health, finances, or politics.
In Professional Settings:
- Solving problems creatively.
- Communicating ideas effectively.
Example:
- A manager uses critical thinking to evaluate the pros and cons of a new business strategy, considering data, potential risks, and employee feedback.
9. Tools for Critical Thinking
- Socratic Questioning: Asking probing questions to clarify and challenge assumptions.
- Argument Mapping: Visualizing the structure of an argument to identify strengths and weaknesses.
- SWOT Analysis: Evaluating strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in decision-making.
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.