Unit quiz: Mind, value, and the discipline of argument

Check understanding, separately from reading

5 questions · 80% to pass · no timer. This quiz checks the lessons in this unit. These authored questions assess recognition and application of the taught distinctions, not professional qualification. You may review the lessons and retry. Repeat attempts reuse the question bank; a remembered answer is not proof of transfer to a new situation.

Saving a lesson records reading only. Previous lesson completions have not been converted into passing scores. You can continue reading without a pass; the assessment remains unpassed.

Question 1

A theorist says a system could implement all the functional roles of pain with no inner feeling whatever. What does this claim do to functionalism?It presses the objection that functional analysis may capture the role of a mental state without capturing its felt characterIt refutes physicalism by showing that mental states are non-physical properties of a single substance

Question 2

Someone argues that because moral codes differ across cultures, moral claims are merely expressions of approval. Which conflation should a careful reader flag?It assumes that moral codes never differ, which is contradicted by the historical recordIt runs together observed variation, which is Mackie’s argument from relativity, with non-cognitivism about the meaning of moral sentences

Question 3

A person born in a state and never having affirmed anything is treated by one theory as bound by a general duty to support just institutions. What is the particularity problem for that theory?Such a general duty would bind the person to any just institution, not specifically to the state that governs herSuch a duty cannot be stated without logical contradiction about who counts as a citizen

Question 4

A passage argues that since careful readers accept the theory and she is careful, she will accept it. A student wants to refute it. What should the student do first?Declare the passage invalid because it reaches a future conclusion from present evidence about the pastSupply the implicit premise the inference needs, mark it as supplied, and then test that premise and the form

Question 5

A critic says an opponent is guilty of the straw man fallacy but gives no argument. What is missing?The criticism must display the argument the opponent actually makes and show that a weaker version was targetedThe criticism must show that the opponent’s conclusion is false, since a straw man charge implies the conclusion fails

Continuing does not mark this assessment passed.

Progress stays in this browser, on this device—not an account or cloud backup. Clearing browser data removes it. Visits never count as study. Previous untimed legacy completions are not invented as study days.