CHAPTER 7 Definitions: Saying What You Mean – Good Reasoning Matters A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking test bank

---

 

Download  file with the answers

Not a member!
Create a FREE account here to get access and download this file with answers

---

CHAPTER 7
Definitions: Saying What You Mean

Multiple Choice Questions

1. Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

Newspaper headline “Red Tape Holds Up New Bridges.”

a) Vagueness
b) Semantic ambiguity
c) Syntactic ambiguity
d) Emotional language
e) Euphemism

2. Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

“The Canadian seal slaughter has officially started, and 388,200 seals are scheduled to be massacred.” (PETA.org)

a) Vagueness
b) Semantic ambiguity
c) Syntactic ambiguity
d) Emotional language
e) Euphemism

3. Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

“Our X-ray unit will give you an examination for tuberculosis and other diseases, which you will receive free of charge.” (Public service announcement)

a) Vagueness
b) Semantic ambiguity
c) Syntactic ambiguity
d) Emotional language
e) Euphemism

4. Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

“Anyone behaving immorally will be severely punished.”

a) Vagueness
b) Semantic ambiguity
c) Syntactic ambiguity
d) Emotional language
e) Euphemism

5. Identify the problem of language in the following statement:

“Summertime cases of food poisoning are no news. So summertime cases of food poisoning are good news, since no news is good news.”

a) Vagueness
b) Semantic ambiguity
c) Syntactic ambiguity
d) Emotional language
e) Euphemism

6. Equivocation is possible due to ________.
a) semantic ambiguity
b) syntactic ambiguity
c) vagueness
d) euphemisms
e) vocational school

7. A real agreement must be built upon ________.
a) the law
b) good will and a handshake
c) mutual understanding of crucial terms and phrases
d) all of the above
e) none of the above

8. How is the following statement best classified?

The “nightshade” is a family of vegetables that includes the potato, the eggplant, the chilli pepper plant, the tobacco plant, and the petunia.

a) Extensional definition
b) Intensional definition
c) Urban definition
d) Traditional definition
e) Not a definition

9. How is the following statement best classified?

According to the Oxford English Dictionary online, a tapir is “a nocturnal hoofed mammal with a stout body, sturdy limbs, and a short flexible proboscis, native to the forests of tropical America and Malaysia.”

a) Extensional definition
b) Intensional definition
c) Urban definition
d) Traditional definition
e) Not a definition

10. If “A” stands for the term defined and “B” for the defining phrase, then ________.
a) those things designated by A must be the same as those things desig¬nated by B
b) those things designated by A must be more numerous than those things designated by B (i.e., the set of things designated by B must fit into the set of things designated by A)
c) those things designated by A must be fewer than those things designated by B (i.e., the set of things designated by A must fit into the set of things designated by B).
d) those things designated by A must be of a different sort than those things designated by B
e) none of the above

11. In which of the following contexts would colour be considered an essential (rather than accidental) characteristic?
a) Definition of “socks”
b) Definition of “ethos”
c) Definition of “blue jay”
d) Definition of “The Toronto Blue Jays”
e) Colour is never an essential characteristic.

12. Which of the rules for good definitions is the following definition violating?

“Dietary protein” are found in meat and peanuts and are necessary for human health.

a) The rule of essential characteristics
b) The rule of equivalence
c) The rule of clarity
d) The rule of neutrality
e) None—the definition is a good one.

13. A circular definition—one that defines a word in terms of the word itself—is violating which of the rules for good definitions?
a) The rule of essential characteristics
b) The rule of equivalence
c) The rule of clarity
d) The rule of neutrality
e) None of the above

14. Once you have established plausible meanings of an author’s claims, you will need to determine which interpretation the author intended. This is something you can do by a process of elimination that is guided by ________.
a) a sense of fidelity to the text, common sense, and the principle of charity
b) a sense of fidelity to the text, common sense, and creativity
c) a sense of fidelity to the author, common sense, and creativity
d) a sense of fidelity to the audience, common sense, and creativity
e) None of the above

True or False Questions

1. The ability to construct definitions, as well as to evaluate them, is a crucial skill in the good reasoner’s repertoire.

2. We do not need to understand an argument’s premises in order to determine whether it is acceptable or not.

3. Language is static, definitions and usage of words do not change over time.

4. Words or phrases are ambiguous when they can have more than one specifiable meaning in the context in which they arise.

5. When an arguer conflates two or more meanings of a term or phrase, we charge them with the fallacy of vocalization.

6. When you do not define your terms in your arguments, you can assume that all members of your audience will chose to attribute the most obscure definition possible to those terms.

7. In an intensional definition, a good defining phrase should include all of the traits of the thing being defined.

8. We should be mindful to provide the audience of our arguments with definitions that will allow them to understand clearly our arguments’ key terms.

9. When discussing a term’s essential characteristics, it is worth remembering that it is always the same characteristics that are counted as essential.

10. The rule of equivalence states that the defining phrase should include neither more nor less than the term being defined.

11. The rule of essential characteristics states that in an intensional definition, the defining phrase must specify the accidental features of the thing defined.

12. The rule of clarity states that the defining phrase must clarify the meaning of the term defined by using words that make it readily understood by the intended audience.

13. The rule of neutrality states that the defining phrase should be neither too acidic nor too alkaline.

14. A claim will be unclear whenever the person to whom it is directed does not understand a term or phrase. Often this is because the term is vague or ambiguous.

15. It is up to an argument’s audience to make sure that they understand all key terms in the way intended by the author, even if this changes throughout the text.

Short Answer Questions

1. Name four of the most common ways in which meanings are lost or misconstrued in written arguments.

2. Why is it important to be clear on the meaning of an argument’s premises and conclusion?

3. What approach should we take if we use words in our argument that do not correspond to a standard meaning of the term?

4. What is a euphemism and why should we exert caution when using them in arguments?

5. How does emotional language differ from euphemisms?

6. What is the difference between vagueness and ambiguity?

7. What is the difference between a verbal dispute and a real dispute?

8. Why must a good reasoner understand the different kinds of definitions and the ways in which they can be used?

9. Is it ever appropriate to use a word out of its conventional understanding?

10. What is a circular definition, and why is it problematic?

 

Short Answer Questions

1. Vagueness, semantic ambiguity, syntactic ambiguity, equivocation and verbal disputes (pp. 171–3)

2. We cannot evaluate whether a particular statement is a reasonable premise or conclusion in an argument if we cannot establish what that statement or one of its component terms means. (p. 168)

3. If we are using a term in an idiosyncratic way that does not correspond to a standard meaning of the term, we need to say so. If there are different uses of a term that need to be distinguished, we should make clear which use we are employing. If our use differs from that of an author we are quoting, we must note the distinction. What we require of ourselves and other arguers is precision in the use of terms. (p. 168)

4. Euphemisms substitute mild and indirect ways of speaking for ways that might seem blunt and harsh. In the interests of social grace or politeness, they function as inoffensive substitutes for coarse, harsh, or inelegant expressions. We should be cautious when using them because there are times when meanings and claims are distorted by the use of euphemisms. (pp. 168–9)

5. In contrast to euphemism, which softens or neutralizes emotional content, emo¬tional language consists of words or phrases infused with an emotional charge. (p. 169)

6. A word or phrase is vague if it has no clearly specifiable meaning for an audience. When we use such terms, we allow our audience to read into them whatever meanings they prefer, and we run the risk of miscommunication. Vagueness can affect whole sentences as well as single words and phrases.
Words or phrases are ambiguous when they can have more than one specifiable meaning in the context in which they arise. An “amphibole” (also called a syntactic ambiguity) is an ambiguity that results from a confusing grammatical construction. Other cases of ambiguity (called semantic ambiguity) result when words with multiple meanings are not used carefully. (pp. 171–2)

7. When a group of arguers is involved in discussion or debate, an equivocation may take the form of a verbal dispute, which can be contrasted with a real dispute. In a real dispute, the parties to the dispute must utter opposing statements. In a verbal dispute, the disputants appear to disagree, but this is an illusion that reflects different meanings they assign to some key term or phrase. What appears to be a real difference is only verbal. (p. 173)

8. Definitions play a central role in many arguments. This is one reason why a good reasoner must understand the different kinds of defini¬tions and the ways in which they can be used. Another reason is the need to use defini¬tions to resolve problems of vagueness and ambiguity that we saw earlier in the chapter. The purpose of a definition is to enable your reader or audience to understand quickly and precisely how you are using a particular term, and/or to point out how a term is generally used. (p. 178)

9. Yes, it can be appropriate to use a word out of its conventional understanding, but in those situations, a good reasoner will specify the definition of the term that he or she is choosing to use. The most important thing is that you inform your audience that the definition you are providing has a non-conventional meaning, so that they understand how you are using it. (p. 180)

10. A circular definition defines a word in terms of the word itself or, in some cases, by using terms or phrases so similar that the meaning of the original term is not made any clearer. Circular definitions are not useful and are likely to confuse your audience. (pp. 185–6)