Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis Flashcards

A study finds that people who own pets live longer on average. A columnist concludes: 'Get a pet to live longer.' What is the most significant flaw?

Answer: Healthier, more active people may be more likely to own pets, reversing the causal direction

Reverse causation is possible: healthier people may seek pets, not pets cause health—the argument mistakes correlation for causation.

Which of the following best distinguishes a 'fact' from an 'inference' in argument analysis?

Answer: A fact is directly observable or verifiable; an inference is a conclusion drawn from facts that goes beyond what is directly stated

Facts are empirically verifiable; inferences extend beyond the evidence and may or may not be valid.

An argument claims that a school's test scores improved because the principal was replaced. Which question is most important to resolve before accepting this conclusion?

Answer: Whether any other changes (curriculum, funding, teaching staff) occurred at the same time as the leadership change

Without ruling out simultaneous changes, the argument cannot isolate the principal change as the causal factor.

In AWA scoring, which element most distinguishes a score-6 essay from a score-4 essay in argument analysis?

Answer: Insightful identification of multiple logical flaws with specific, well-developed reasoning

Score-6 essays demonstrate depth of critical analysis—identifying nuanced flaws and developing each point thoroughly—not merely surface correctness.

An argument concludes that walking meetings increase creativity based on one executive's report. What type of evidence would most strengthen this argument?

Answer: Controlled experiments comparing creativity output in walking vs. seated meetings across multiple organizations

Controlled experiments with multiple organizations isolate the walking meeting variable and make the causal claim far more defensible.

Which of the following is an example of an 'appeal to tradition' fallacy?

Answer: 'We have always done it this way, so we should continue doing it this way.'

Appeal to tradition argues that something is correct or good simply because it has been done historically, ignoring whether it is actually optimal.

An AWA argument ends with the recommendation: 'Therefore, the company should immediately double its marketing budget.' What must a strong critique address?

Answer: Whether the evidence provided actually supports that doubling the budget specifically will produce the desired outcome

A critique must evaluate whether the leap from evidence to the specific recommendation (doubling the budget) is logically justified.