Analyze the following argument in terms of new case, comparison cases, known similarities, and inferred similarity.  Then indicate what seems to you the most significant relevant dissimilarity between the new case and the comparison cases. For the first 6 to 8 weeks of pregnancy, the fetus has no brain waves.  It’s like a brain-dead adult.  So, just as it is morally permissible to take a brain dead adult off life-support, it’s OK to take a 6 to 8 week old fetus off maternal life support.

Complete the following argument by analogy in a plausible way by adding a comparison case and some known similarities.  Then indicate what seems to you the most significant relevant dissimilarity between the new case and the comparison case. new case:  Wearing cloth face masks in indoor public spaces during a viral respiratory pandemic inferred similarity:  should be required by law.

For the following argument: Select symbols and be sure to define them accurately.  [2 points] Put the argument into standard form as a hypothetical or disjunctive syllogism.  [4 points] Identify the form (e.g., “affirming the necessary condition,” or “denying the disjunct”).  [2 points] Determine whether it is valid or invalid.  If the argument has a missing premise or conclusion, complete the argument to make it come out valid, putting the added proposition in square brackets.  [2 points] If these charges being brought against former president Trump were all true, then it would be foolish for the Republican party to nominate him to be their presidential candidate 2024.  But some of the charges are plainly false.  Therefore, Trump wouldn’t be a bad choice.

For the following argument: Select symbols and be sure to define them accurately.  [2 points] Put the argument into standard form as a hypothetical or disjunctive syllogism.  [4 points] Identify the form (e.g., “affirming the necessary condition,” or “denying the disjunct”).  [2 points] Determine whether it is valid or invalid.  If the argument has a missing premise or conclusion, complete the argument to make it come out valid, putting the added proposition in square brackets.  [2 points] There’s no way the meat you bought is fresh.  It can’t both be fresh and smell sour.

For the following argument: Select symbols and be sure to define them accurately.  [2 points] Put the argument into standard form as a hypothetical or disjunctive syllogism.  [4 points] Identify the form (e.g., “affirming the necessary condition,” or “denying the disjunct”).  [2 points] Determine whether it is valid or invalid.  If the argument has a missing premise or conclusion, complete the argument to make it come out valid, putting the added proposition in square brackets.  [2 points] You say you’ve found out that your husband has been working deep into the night, night after night, on a project with a colleague from work?  That must come as a relief.  Because it was either that or he has gotten romantically involved with another woman

Which country is NOT an officially Spanish-speaking country?

Which Spanish question is needed to get this answer:  Yo soy optimista y muy trabajadora.

Consider the following argument: I thought I was allergic to cats, but twice this week I handled cats without developing a rash.  So my rashes must have been caused by something else. Now consider this claim: I handled cats this week without developing a rash. Indicate two things: Is the claim an unsupported premise, a supported premise, the argument’s conclusion, or neither a premise nor a conclusion (NPNC)? And is the claim being made explicitly, implicitly, or is it neither stated nor assumed (NSNA)?

Consider the following argument: One of the main reasons for studying logic, or “critical thinking” as it’s sometimes called nowadays, is to achieve familiarity with some of the more important forms that reasoning takes — syllogisms, analogies, generalizations, and the like.  However common these forms may be, they aren’t widely understood, not with the kind of clarity needed to criticize arguments well.  As a result of this ignorance, people giving reasons in support of their claims tend to be bad, not just at listening to one another, but also at listening to themselves.  This is a serious problem in human life.  One might think that having reasons in support of one’s beliefs and actions is good, but having bad reasons is in some ways more dangerous than having no reasons at all.  Bad reasoning makes people into proud, self-righteous, unwitting fools, threats to themselves and others.  This is a reason why students should be required to study logic — which is to say to practice it, logic being a set of skills acquired only through doing.  If begun in college, this should begin early, ideally in the student’s first year of studies, and it should continue throughout their time at the institution. Now consider this claim: For most people, the basic forms of reasoning are generally not understood well enough for them to be good at criticizing arguments. Indicate two things: Is the claim an unsupported premise, a supported premise, the argument’s conclusion, or neither a premise nor a conclusion (NPNC)? And is the claim being made explicitly, implicitly, or is it neither stated nor assumed (NSNA)?

Match times appropriately.