1
PLS2601
Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2024 - DUE September 2024
,1
PLS2601 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester
2 2024 - DUE September 2024
1. Understanding Critical Reasoning: Answer True or False: 1.1 The outcome of this
module is to enable students to identify, construct and evaluate arguments. (2) 1.2 Critical
Reasoning promotes dogmatic reasoning. (2) 1.3 The term ‘Critical Reasoning’ can be used
interchangeably with the terms ‘critical thinking’ and ‘clear thinking.’ (2) 1.4 Critical
reasoning can also be understood as ‘informal logic’. (2) 1.5 Critical Reasoning does not
enable thinkers to think critically and reflectively. (2) 2. Different kinds of writings and
definitions: 2.1 Identify the type of writing in each of the paragraphs or statements. 2.1.1
Some people believe that even if you can get away with awful crimes on this earth and are
not punished by the law or your fellow men, such acts are forbidden by God, who will
punish you after death. So even when it seems to be in your interest to do such a thing it
really isn't. Some people have even believed that if there is no God to back up moral
requirements with the threat of punishment and the promise of reward, morality is an
illusion (Thomas Nagel – What does it all mean? p. 62). (2) 2.1.2 Arrange each of the
arguments below in the standard way and say whether they are valid. Try to keep track of
how you decide whether each one is valid. (2) 2.2 What kind of definitions are expressed
in the statements below. 2.2.1 ‘Aereomobile’ means a vehicle that is normally driven on the
ground but that has the capability of flying through the air to avoid traffic congestion. (2)
2.2.2 The word ‘unicorn’ means an animal like a horse but having a single straight horn
projecting from its forehead. (2) 3. Informal Fallacies: 3.1 Briefly describe each of the
following fallacies: Semester 2 of 2024 Assignment 2 2 3.1.1 Straw man argument (3) 3.1.2
Begging the question (3) 3.1.3 Hasty generalization (3) 3.2 What type of informal fallacy is
found in each of the following paragraphs? 3.2.1 Child to parent: ‘Your argument that I
should stop stealing sweets from the corner store is no good. You told me yourself just a
week ago that you too stole sweets when you were a child. So, let me steal sweets as well.’
(2) 3.2.2 ‘Surely you welcome the opportunity to join our protective organisation. Think of
all the money you will lose from broken windows, overturned trucks and damaged
merchandise in the event of you not joining.’ (2) 3.2.3 We've all heard the argument that
too much television is the reason our students can't read and write. Yet, many of today's
TV shows are excellent. ‘Seinfeld’ explores important issues facing single people, ‘Mzansi
Magic’ presents medical professionals in life and death situations and ‘Checkpoint’ exposes
a great variety of scams and illegal practises. Today's TV is just great! (2) 4. Argument
Evaluation: 1. Evaluate the following two arguments. 2. In your evaluation, state whether
the argument is inductive or deductive, value or empirical, contains a fallacy or not
(stipulate which fallacy if it contains one) and whether it is valid/invalid or
sound/unsound or strong/weak if it is an Induction. 3. Present your responses on how you
have evaluated the two arguments in the form of a table. The table is provided below after
the two arguments: Argument 4.1 Most corporate lawyers are conservatives. Barbara
Shane is a corporate lawyer. Therefore, Barbara Shane is probably a conservative.
Argument 4.2 All animals are mortal. All humans are animals. Therefore, all humas are
mortal. Semester 2 of 2024 Assignment 2 3 Table in which to provide your answers is here
below. But you can also draw your own table. [1x10=10] 5. Argument Maps/Diagrams:
, 1
Create argument maps/argument diagrams of the arguments in 5.1, 5.2 & 5.3 below. But
first see how we did it in the following Example: (a) Human beings are buried respectfully
after they have died. (b) When they are sick, we do everything to save their lives.
Therefore, (c) human beings are dignified creatures. [Tip: First show how you have
formalized the argument (i.e show what the premises and conclusion/s are] Premise1:
Human beings are buried respectfully after they have died (a) Premise2: we do everything
to save their lives (b) Conclusion: Therefore, human beings are dignified creatures (c)
Argument map/diagram a b c Be sure that you number the statements as they are labelled
in the questions. Inductive or Deductive Value or empirical Fallacy? If ‘Yes,’ which? Valid /
invalid or sound / unsound Argument 4.1 Argument 4.2 Semester 2 of 2024 Assignment 2
4 5.1 Because (1) the greatest mitochondrial variations occurred in African people,
scientists concluded that (2) they (Africans) had the longest evolutionary history,
indicating (3) a probable African origin for modern humans. (6 marks) 5.2 (1) This
dichotomy between the ‘best’ and the ‘best black’ is not something manufactured by
racists to denigrate the abilities of professionals who are not white. (2) On the contrary, it
is reinforced from time to time by those students who demand that universities commit to
hiring some preset number of minority faculty members, saying in effect ‘go out and hire
the best blacks’. (3) And it is further reinforced by faculty members who see these
demands as nothing more than claims for simple justice. (4 marks) 5.3 (1) Recent evidence
suggests that minimum-wage hikes undermine the welfare-to-work transition. (2) Kevin
Lang of Boston University found that low skill adults often were crowded out of the job
market by teenagers and part time students after a minimum-wage increase, though adults
have a greater need for income. (3) Peter Brendan of the University of Wisconsin reports
that minimum-wage hikes result in lower work-force participation among welfare
mothers. (4) This suggests that President Clinton’s proposal to raise the minimum wage
undercuts his goal of ending welfare as we know it. (7 marks)
Understanding Critical Reasoning
True or False
1.1 True - Students who study critical reasoning should be able
to recognize, formulate, and assess arguments.
