Question 1

Causal arguments are a kind of&#8230;&#10;A) Deductive argument&#10;B) Valid inference&#10;C) Inductive argument&#10;D) Argument by analogy

Accepted Answer

Causal arguments are a type of inductive argument because they infer from specific instances or observations to general conclusions, often suggesting that one thing causes another based on observed patterns or correlations.

Question 2

A sufficient condition for the occurrence of an event is&#8230;&#10;A) One that guarantees that the event occurs&#10;B) One without which the event cannot occur&#10;C) One that is improbable&#10;D) One that cannot guarantee that the event occurs

Accepted Answer

A sufficient condition is one that, if met, ensures the event will occur, guaranteeing its occurrence.

Question 3

If the premises of a strong causal argument are true, then the conclusion is&#8230;&#10;A) Necessarily true&#10;B) Probably true&#10;C) Certainly true&#10;D) Logically guaranteed

Accepted Answer

In a strong causal argument, if the premises are true, the conclusion is likely or probably true, but not necessarily or certainly true, because causal arguments often deal with probabilities rather than certainties.

Question 4

Given the ordinary laws of statistics, incredible coincidences are&#8230;&#10;A) Always evidence of causal connections&#10;B) Evidence of the paranormal&#10;C) Impossible&#10;D) Common and must occur

Accepted Answer

Incredible coincidences are a natural outcome of the ordinary laws of statistics. Given a large enough sample size or enough opportunities, events with very low probability are bound to occur. This is often misunderstood, leading people to attribute more significance to these occurrences than they statistically warrant.

Question 5

A necessary condition for the occurrence of an event is&#8230;&#10;A) One that guarantees that the event occurs&#10;B) One without which the event cannot occur&#10;C) One that cannot guarantee that the event occurs&#10;D) Unlikely

Accepted Answer

A necessary condition is one that must be met for an event to occur, but on its own, it does not guarantee the event will happen.

Question 6

The rule of thumb for distinguishing coincidence from cause and effect is&#8230;&#10;A) Don't assume that a causal connection exists unless you have good reason for doing so&#10;B) Don't assume that a causal connection exists unless your assumption is beyond doubt&#10;C) There is no such thing as coincidence&#10;D) Don't ever assume that a causal connection exists

Accepted Answer

The rule of thumb for distinguishing coincidence from cause and effect emphasizes not assuming a causal connection exists without good reason, encouraging a cautious approach to interpreting correlations.

Question 7

A necessary condition for the occurrence of an event is one without which the event&#8230;&#10;A) Is guaranteed to occur&#10;B) Would be delayed&#10;C) Cannot occur&#10;D) Would be unknown

Accepted Answer

A necessary condition for the occurrence of an event is one without which the event cannot occur.

Question 8

A sufficient condition for the occurrence of an event is one that&#8230;&#10;A) Ensures that the event cannot occur&#10;B) Guarantees that the event occurs&#10;C) Is negligible&#10;D) Might or might not precipitate the event

Accepted Answer

A sufficient condition for an event means that if the condition is met, the event will definitely occur. It guarantees the occurrence of the event.

Question 9

The most common kind of argument used to reason to a causal conclusion is&#8230;&#10;A) Inference to the best explanation&#10;B) Enumerative induction&#10;C) Argument by analogy&#10;D) Hypothetical syllogism

Accepted Answer

Inference to the best explanation is commonly used to reason towards a causal conclusion because it involves selecting the hypothesis that would, if true, best explain the relevant evidence. This method is particularly useful in establishing causality as it allows for the consideration of various potential causes and the selection of the most plausible one based on the available evidence.

Question 10

When we confuse cause with temporal order, we are guilty of the fallacy called&#8230;&#10;A) Causal miscalculation&#10;B) Hasty generalization&#10;C) Post hoc, ergo propter hoc&#10;D) Gambler's fallacy

Accepted Answer

The fallacy "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc" involves assuming that because one event follows another, the first event must be the cause of the second. This fallacy is about confusing cause with temporal order.

Question 11

When we answer a question about what causes what, we make a. . .&#10;A) Representative statement&#10;B) Sampling assertion&#10;C) Necessary condition claim&#10;D) Causal claim

Accepted Answer

The answer of When we answer a question about what...

Question 12

A modified version of Mill's Method of Agreement says that if two or more occurrences of a phenomenon have only one relevant factor in common, &#8230;&#10;A) The occurrence is acausal&#10;B) The occurrence has two causes&#10;C) That factor must be the cause&#10;D) That factor can be discounted

Accepted Answer

The answer of A modified version of Mill's Method of...

Question 13

Mill's (modified) Method of Difference says that the relevant factor present when a phenomenon occurs and absent when the phenomenon does not occur&#8230;&#10;A) Is irrelevant&#10;B) Must be the cause&#10;C) Makes no difference&#10;D) Cannot be the cause

Accepted Answer

The answer of Mill's (modified) Method of Difference says that...

Question 14

The Method of Concomitant Variation says that when two events are correlated-when one varies in close connection with the other-they are probably&#8230;&#10;A) Causally related&#10;B) Related in a post hoc fashion&#10;C) Uncaused&#10;D) Coincidentally related

Accepted Answer

The answer of The Method of Concomitant Variation says that...

Question 15

This argument-&#34;John's headache went away after he drank a cup of coffee. The coffee cured his headache.&#34;-illustrates&#8230;&#10;A) The post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy&#10;B) The scientific method&#10;C) Deductive reasoning&#10;D) The tu quoque fallacy

Accepted Answer

The answer of This argument-&#34;John's headache went away after he...

Question 16

People are especially prone to &#34;it can't be just coincidence&#34; thinking because &#8230;&#10;A) They are too good at judging probabilities&#10;B) They misjudge the probabilities involved&#10;C) They know that every event has a cause&#10;D) Every event is unlikely

Accepted Answer

The answer of People are especially prone to &#34;it can't...

Question 17

Confusing cause and effect&#8230;&#10;A) Is an easy mistake to make in everyday life as well as in science&#10;B) Almost never happens in everyday life&#10;C) Is not a problem in science&#10;D) Never has any dire consequences in the real world

Accepted Answer

The answer of Confusing cause and effect&#8230;&#10;A) Is an easy...

Question 18

Scientists usually assume that a correlation between two events means that&#8230;&#10;A) The correlation is meaningless&#10;B) No cause is present&#10;C) One event causes the other&#10;D) The connection may or may not be causal

Accepted Answer

The answer of Scientists usually assume that a correlation between...

Question 19

Your ability to identify relevant factors in causal connections depends mostly on&#8230;&#10;A) Acausal factors&#10;B) Expert opinion&#10;C) Your background knowledge&#10;D) Your knowledge of physics

Accepted Answer

The answer of Your ability to identify relevant factors in...

Question 20

The many correlations between the lives of JFK and Abraham Lincoln show that&#8230;&#10;A) The correlations are actually causal connections&#10;B) Finding such correlations is extremely difficult&#10;C) The two presidents were somehow psychically linked&#10;D) Such correlations are extremely easy to find.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The many correlations between the lives of...

Question 21

What is a causal argument and what are Mill's criteria for judging its strength?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What is a causal argument and what...

Question 22

How can the post hoc fallacy lead someone to serious harm?

Accepted Answer

The answer of How can the post hoc fallacy lead...

Question 23

How can someone be misled by coincidence?

Accepted Answer

The answer of How can someone be misled by coincidence?...

Question 24

What is an example of confusing cause and effect in everyday situations?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What is an example of confusing cause...

Question 25

What are necessary and sufficient conditions? Are there necessary and sufficient conditions for combustion? Explain.

Accepted Answer

The answer of What are necessary and sufficient conditions? Are...

Deck 9: Causal Arguments