Structure of Arguments MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Structure of Arguments - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is - IIIrd figure

Key Points

• IIIrd figure
  • The syllogism provided follows the structure of the IIIrd figure.
  • In the IIIrd figure, the middle term is the subject in the first premise and the predicate in the second premise.
  • In the given argument:
    • All artists (middle term) are egoists (predicate).
    • Some artists (middle term) are paupers (predicate).
    • Therefore, some paupers are egoists.

Additional Information

• Syllogism Figures
  • There are four figures in syllogistic logic which describe the possible positions of the middle term in the premises:
    • Ist figure: Middle term is the subject in the first premise and the predicate in the second premise.
    • IInd figure: Middle term is the predicate in both premises.
    • IIIrd figure: Middle term is the subject in both premises.
    • IVth figure: Middle term is the predicate in the first premise and the subject in the second premise.
  • Understanding the structure of these figures is crucial in determining the validity of syllogistic arguments.
• Middle Term
  • The middle term in a syllogism is the term that appears in both premises but not in the conclusion.
  • Its correct placement is essential for the logical flow of the argument.

The correct answer is - (A) and (D) Only

Key Points

• Contradictory Propositions
  • Two propositions are said to be contradictory if they cannot both be true at the same time and they cannot both be false at the same time.
  • Statement (A): "All judges are lawyers" implies that every single judge is a lawyer.
  • Statement (D): "Some judges are not lawyers" implies that there exists at least one judge who is not a lawyer.
  • Since statement (A) claims that every judge is a lawyer, it directly contradicts statement (D), which claims that there is at least one judge who is not a lawyer.

Additional Information

• Logical Relationships
  • Contradiction: Two statements are contradictory if one being true means the other must be false.
  • Contrary: Two statements are contrary if they cannot both be true, but they can both be false.
  • Subcontrary: Two statements are subcontrary if they cannot both be false, but they can both be true.
  • Subalternation: This refers to the logical relationship between a universal proposition and its corresponding particular proposition (e.g., "All S are P" and "Some S are P").
• Examples
  • Contradictory Example: "All cats are animals" vs. "Some cats are not animals" (cannot both be true or both be false).
  • Contrary Example: "All cats are black" vs. "No cats are black" (cannot both be true, but can both be false).
  • Subcontrary Example: "Some cats are black" vs. "Some cats are not black" (cannot both be false, but can both be true).
  • Subalternation Example: "All birds can fly" (universal) implies "Some birds can fly" (particular).

The correct answer is - A, B, D, E only

Key Points

• Fallacy of Reification
  • The Fallacy of Reification occurs when an abstract concept is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity.
  • W.I. Thomas's concept of "Four Wishes" is often critiqued for falling into this fallacy by attributing concrete desires to abstract social constructs.
• Examples
  • A. Experiencing new situation - This is an example of reification as it treats the abstract concept of experiencing something new as a concrete wish.
  • B. Securing the recognition of others - This is another example where the abstract idea of recognition is treated as a concrete desire.
  • D. Retaining feelings of security - Here, the abstract feeling of security is reified into a concrete wish.
  • E. Eliciting response from others - This also falls under reification as it treats the abstract idea of eliciting a response as a concrete wish.
• C. Hypothetical participation is not an example of reification in this context.

Additional Information

• W.I. Thomas's "Four Wishes"
  • W.I. Thomas proposed that human behavior is motivated by four fundamental wishes: the wish for new experience, the wish for recognition, the wish for security, and the wish for response.
  • These wishes are considered basic drives behind human actions and social behavior.
• Critique of Reification
  • Reification is often criticized in social sciences for oversimplifying complex social phenomena by treating abstract concepts as tangible realities.
  • Understanding the fallacy of reification is crucial for accurately analyzing social theories and avoiding misinterpretations.

The correct answer is - AII; IIIrd Figure

Key Points

• AII; IIIrd Figure
  • This notation stands for a syllogistic figure and mood where:
    • A - Universal Affirmative (All actors are athletes)
    • I - Particular Affirmative (Some actors are comedians)
    • I - Particular Affirmative (Therefore, some comedians are athletes)
  • In the 3rd Figure of syllogism, the structure is:
    • Major premise: All A are B
    • Minor premise: Some A are C
    • Conclusion: Some C are B
  • This structure correctly follows the given argument where:
    • All actors (A) are athletes (B)
    • Some actors (A) are comedians (C)
    • Therefore, some comedians (C) are athletes (B)

Additional Information

• Figures of Syllogism
  • There are four figures in syllogistic logic, each defining different positions of the middle term:
    • 1st Figure: Middle term is the subject in the major premise and the predicate in the minor premise.
    • 2nd Figure: Middle term is the predicate in both premises.
    • 3rd Figure: Middle term is the subject in both premises.
    • 4th Figure: Middle term is the predicate in the major premise and the subject in the minor premise.
• Mood of Syllogism
  • The mood of a syllogism is determined by the types of propositions (A, E, I, O):
    • A: Universal Affirmative
    • E: Universal Negative
    • I: Particular Affirmative
    • O: Particular Negative

The correct answer is - Equivocation

Key Points

• Equivocation
  • Equivocation occurs when a key term or phrase in an argument is used in an ambiguous way, with one meaning in one part of the argument and another meaning in another part.
  • In the given statement, the term "man" is used ambiguously to refer to both "human beings" in general and "male humans" specifically.
  • The argument falsely concludes that no woman has an immortal soul by equivocating the term "man".

Additional Information

• Strawman Fallacy
  • Occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's position to make it easier to attack.
  • Example: "People who support space exploration want to waste money on frivolous projects." This misrepresents the position of supporting space exploration for scientific advancement.
• Red Herring
  • Introduces an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue.
  • Example: During a debate on climate change, someone brings up the issue of unemployment to distract from the main topic.
• Bandwagon Argument
  • Concludes that an argument is true because many people believe it.
  • Example: "Everyone is investing in this stock, so it must be a good investment."

The standard form of categorical proposition having the same subject term and predicate term but may differ from each other in quality or quantity or both. Such differing has been called opposition. The term opposition is used when there is no apparent disagreement between the propositions.

Important Points

The square, traditionally conceived, looks like this:

Types of Opposition:

1. Contradictories: The standard form of a categorical proposition that has the same subject and predicate term but differs from each other in both quantity and quality. Two propositions are contradictory if one is denial or negation of the other if they can’t be true or can’t be both false.

Example:

• All philosophers are fallible
• Socrates is not fallible

2. Contraries: Two propositions are said to be contraries if they can’t both be true, and the truth of one entails the truth of the other. i.e. both can’t be true and both can’t be false. If either of these propositions is true, then the other must be false.

Example:

• All artists are dreamers.
• No artist is a dreamer

3. Sub-contraries: If a particular proposition having the same subject and predicate terms but differing in quality, one affirming the other denying. Two propositions are said to be sub-contraries if they can’t both be false although both may be true.

Example:

• Some cars are vehicles.
• Some cars are not vehicles.

4. Subalternation: It is the opposition between a universal proposition and its corresponding particular proposition. In the corresponding proposition, the universal proposition is called the superaltern and the particular proposition is called subaltern. These propositions have the same subject and predicate terms and agree on quality. Both are affirming or both denying but differ in quantity. One universal and the other particular.

Example:

• No hens are birds
• Some hens are not birds

Therefore, from the above explanation, we can conclude that option 2 is the correct answer.

According to Nyāya (classical Indian school of logic) 'Sound is eternal because it is produced' is Viruddha argument.

Key PointsViruddha:

• In Ayurveda, one of the key principles is "Viruddha", which refers to incompatible or contradictory substances, activities, or conditions.
• The term "Viruddha" means "opposite" or "contradictory."
• A "Viruddha argument" refers to an argument that is self-contradictory or contradictory to established principles.
• In Ayurveda, a Viruddha argument could be an argument that contradicts the principles of the treatment or the diagnosis of a disease.
• For example, if a person is suffering from a cold, and a practitioner suggests drinking cold water to cure it, it would be a Viruddha argument because cold water would aggravate the cold symptoms.

Additional InformationSãdhāraṇa:

• "Sādhāraṇa" is a Sanskrit term that can be translated as "general" or "common."
• In Hindu philosophy, it is used to refer to that which is universal or applicable to all.
• For example, sādhāraṇa dharma refers to the universal principles of righteousness that apply to all people regardless of their caste or social status.

Svarūpāsiddha:

• Svarūpāsiddha is a concept in the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, a school of Hindu philosophy.
• It refers to the innate nature of the self, which is said to be already perfect and complete, and not in need of any external validation or transformation.

Mistake Points Sãdhāraṇa:

According to Nyaya philosophy, sadhāraṇa represents the common or shared attribute that is present in multiple individual objects or entities. It refers to the universal aspect or general characteristic that is shared by a group of particular objects or instances.

Svarūpāsiddha:

In Nyaya philosophy, the term "svarūpāsiddha" refers to self-established or self-evident knowledge. It is a type of knowledge that is directly perceived or apprehended without the need for any further proof or justification.

"The last time I stretched my arms first and my legs second, I won my race, So that stretching sequence must have increased my speed." The Post hoc informal fallacy is committed in the above statement.

Key PointsPost hoc:

• The informal fallacy committed in the above statement is post hoc ergo propter hoc, which means "after this, therefore because of this."
• The fallacy assumes that because one event happened before another, it must have caused the second event.
• In this case, the person assumes that the stretching sequence caused them to win the race because they did the stretching sequence before the race and then won.
• However, there could be other factors that contributed to their win, such as their overall fitness, training, or even luck, rather than the stretching sequence alone.

Therefore, this argument is flawed, and it is essential to consider other possible explanations before jumping to conclusions.

Additional InformationFalse alternative:

• A false alternative fallacy occurs when only two options are presented as the only possible choices, when in reality there may be other options available.
• This fallacy is also known as a false dichotomy or black and white fallacy. 
• For example, a politician might say, "You are either with us or against us," implying that there are only two options: support their policy or be against it. This argument ignores the possibility that someone may have a different opinion or propose an alternative solution.

Hasty generalization:

• Hasty generalization, also known as "jumping to conclusions," is a logical fallacy in which a conclusion is drawn based on insufficient or limited evidence. 
• For example, if someone assumes that all dogs are aggressive based on one bad experience with a dog, that would be a hasty generalization. Similarly, if someone assumes that all politicians are corrupt because of a few cases of political corruption, that would also be a hasty generalization.

Slippery slope:

• The slippery slope is a logical fallacy that suggests that if a particular action is allowed, it will inevitably lead to a series of increasingly negative consequences or actions. 
• For example, a common slippery slope argument is that if we legalize marijuana, it will inevitably lead to the legalization of harder drugs like heroin and cocaine. However, this argument ignores the fact that each drug has unique properties and effects, and the legalization of one does not necessarily lead to the legalization of others.

A fallacy is a type of arguing which appears to be valid, but actually invalid. The term fallacy comes from the Latin word ‘fallo,’ meaning ‘I deceive.’ The fallacy is the class name given to bad (illogical) arguments. Fallacies are like plastic flowers: They give you the impression that they are valid. But, a student of logic, like a bee, should be able to distinguish between the real (valid) and the artificial (invalid). 

Examples: ‘This man is not clever because he cannot talk fast’ or ‘He is not a patriot because he does not wear khadi.’ Any argument of this sort is fallacious.

1. APPEAL TO EMOTION (ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM) is making use of the feelings and prejudices of people rather than their reason. This is perhaps the most common of fallacies.

Example: In campaigning for election in India one might ask: ‘Should you not vote for the Congress? Did not the congressmen suffer imprisonment for the sake of the country?’ Thus, the speaker appeals to patriotism, an honorable emotion, without clear evidence to appeal to the feelings of his audience. Besides politicians, many others, like advertisers, commit this fallacy.

2. EQUIVOCATION is the fallacy that consists in using words or phrases with two or more meanings, deliberately or accidentally, while formulating an argument.

3.THE APPEAL TO INAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY (ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM) This is a very common and crafty fallacy because a person who is an expert in one field is taken as an expert in some other, comparatively, unrelated field. If, for example, we take Bertrand Russell, a great authority on philosophy, as an authority on the matter of shoes, we commit this fallacy.

4. MISSING THE POINT (AD IGNORATIO) is diverting attention from the real point at issue. It is arguing beside the point. Example: ‘The object of war is peace; therefore, soldiers are the best peacemakers.’ Even if it is assumed that the object of war is peace, still it does not imply that soldiers are the best peacemakers.

Hence, From the above explanation, it is clear that “Everyone is going to the party; you should go too.” the kind of fallacy stated here is AD POPULUM,   because in this kind of fallacy people try to convince us of something, rather than logically relevant reasons.

A proposition consists of a subject (about which something is said), predicate (states something about the subject) and copula (denotes the relation between subject and predicate).  A proposition concerning quality is either affirmative or negative, and concerning the quantity, they are either universal or particular.

For example, All flowers (subject) are (copula) pink (predicate)

A categorical proposition can be interpreted as asserting a relation of inclusion or exclusion, complete or partial, between two classes. A class is a collection of all objects which has some common characteristic. For example, ‘All S are P’.

There are Four Types of Categorical Propositions:

1. Universal Affirmative (A):

• It is a proposition of the form ‘All S are P’.
• They begin with All, Every, etc.
• The term ‘universal’ implies a proposition that remains constant and universal and is true in all circumstances and the absence of negative words such as no, not, etc. indicates it is affirmative.

2. Universal Negative (E): It is a proposition of the form ‘No S is P’. It begins with ‘No’, ‘None’, etc.
3. Particular Affirmative (I): It is a proposition of the form ‘Some S are P’. It begins with ‘Some’.
4. Particular Negative(O): It is a proposition of the form ‘Some S are not P’.

Hence, the above points make it clear that the given proposition is of the Universal affirmative form.

A proposition is the basic building block of logic. It is defined as a declarative sentence that is either True or False.

Logic is concerned with the laws of truth. Logic will therefore be those things that can be true or false. Hence, propositions are those things that can be true or false.

The fundamental idea is this: a proposition is a claim about how things are—it represents the world as being some way; it is true if the world is that way, and otherwise it is false.

Truth is the attribute of a proposition that asserts what reality is the case.

It seeks to discover laws governing the relationships between the truth or the falsity of different propositions.

Hence, Truth and falsity are attributes of individual propositions. 

Extra Info-

The argument is a statement or set of statements that one uses in order to try to convince people that your opinion about something is correct.

The opinion is a thought or belief about something or someone.

A debate is a formal discussion, for example in a parliament or institution, in which people express different opinions about a particular subject

The correct answer is Both A and R are correct and R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
Important PointsAssertion A: Deductive arguments are indeed either invalid or valid.

• A deductive argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
• It is invalid if the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.

Reason R: A valid deductive argument that also has all true premises is indeed called a "sound" argument.

• However, this does not explain why deductive arguments are either invalid or valid.
• That's a function of the structure of the argument itself, not whether it's sound or unsound.

So, the correct answer from the options given is:

Both A and R are correct and R is NOT the correct explanation of A
Additional Information

Deductive Argument:

• This is a type of logical argument that attempts to show its conclusions as necessarily following from its premises.
• In other words, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.
• A common form of a deductive argument is a syllogism, like:

Premise 1: All men are mortal.

Premise 2: Socrates is a man.

Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

In this example, if both premises are true (and they are), the conclusion must also be true.

Validity:

• In logic, an argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
• It's important to note that validity doesn't concern whether the premises or conclusion are actually true or false, but whether the argument holds the correct logical form.
• Even with false premises, an argument can be valid if the conclusion would logically follow if the premises were true.

Soundness:

• A deductive argument is sound if it is both valid (the conclusion logically follows from the premises) and the premises are true.
• So, a sound argument guarantees the truth of the conclusion.
• In Reason R from your question, it correctly states the definition of a sound argument.
• However, this doesn't directly explain why deductive arguments are either invalid or valid, as stated in Assertion A.
• The validity of a deductive argument is determined by whether its conclusion logically follows from its premises, not by whether it's sound or not.

Categorical proposition :

• In logic, the categorical proposition is also known as a categorical statement that asserts or denies that all or some of the members of one category are included in another.
• It is an important branch of deductive reasoning.
• The categorical proposition can be classified into four under two heads, based on their quality and quantity, and distribution of terms.
  • Affirmative proposition (affirmo): A type and I type
  • Negative proposition (nego): E type and O type

Quantity of categorical proposition:

• It is the number of members of the subject class that are used in the proposition. 
• It could be the universal or the particular categorical proposition.
• It will consider universal if all members of the subject class refer to it.

Quality of categorical proposition:

• It is described as whether the proposition affirms or denies the inclusion of a subject within the class of the predicate. 
• It could be affirmative or negative.

Validity:

• An argument is valid if and only if in every case where all the premises are true, the conclusion is true. Otherwise, the argument is invalid.

Mood:

• The mood of a categorical syllogism is a series of three letters corresponding to the type of proposition the major premise, the minor premise, and the conclusion is (A, E, I, or O).
• The mood will help us to determine when such syllogisms are valid or invalid.

​Figure:

• The figure of a categorical syllogism is a number that corresponds to the placement of the two middle terms. 

Therefore, the quantity and quality of a categorical proposition decide the mode of the proposition.

The standard form of categorical proposition having the same subject term and predicate term but may differ from each other in quality or quantity or both. Such differing has been called opposition. The term opposition is used when there is no apparent disagreement between the propositions.

Types of Opposition:

1. Contradictories: The standard form of a categorical proposition that has the same subject and predicate term but differs from each other in both quantity and quality. Two propositions are contradictories if one is denial or negation of the other if they can’t be true or can’t be both false.

• Example:
  1. All trees are plants.
  2. Some trees are not plants.

2. Contraries: Two propositions are said to be contraries if they can’t both be true, and the truth of one entails of the truth of the other. i.e. both can’t be true and both can’t be false. If either of these propositions is true, then the other must be false.

• Example:
  1. All artists are dreamers.
  2. No artist is dreamer

3. Sub-contraries: If a particular proposition having the same subject and predicate terms but differing in quality, one affirming the other denying. Two propositions are said to be sub-contraries if they can’t both be false although both may be true.

• Example:
  1. Some cars are vehicles.
  2. Some cars are not vehicles.

4. Subalternation: It is the opposition between a universal proposition and its corresponding particular proposition. In the corresponding proposition, the universal proposition is called superaltern and the particular proposition is called subaltern. These propositions have the same subject and predicate term and agree in quality. Both are affirming or both denying but differ in quantity. On universal and the other particular.

• Example:
  1. No hens are birds
  2. Some hens are not birds

5. The square of opposition: There are four ways in which propositions may be opposed as contradictories, contraries, sub-contraries, subalterns and superaltern. These are represented using a diagram called the square of opposition.

Hence, from the given points it is clear that subaltern is when the subject and predicate of both the premises are the same but they differ only in quantity.

The nature of a logical argument can be valid or invalid.

Logical argument:

• A logical argument is a process of creating a new statement from the existing statements
• It comes to a conclusion from a set of premises by means of logical implications via logical inference
• An argument can be valid or invalid
• An argument can have more than one premises but one conclusion
• An argument helps to determine the degree of truth of other statements