1.7 English 2

Question

Read the first two sentences from the speech “On Civil Disobedience” by Mohandas Gandhi.

There are two ways of countering injustice. One way is to smash the head of the man who perpetrates injustice and to get your own head smashed in the process.

Which choice best shows how these sentences reveal the purpose of Gandhi’s speech?

• The straightforward approach of the first two sentences suggests that he will present the two methods in an unemotional way.

• The either/or fallacy in the first sentence suggests that he will persuade the audience that countering injustice is a simple issue.

• The tone and appeal to emotion in the second sentence suggest that he will argue for a second method of countering injustice.

• The hyperbole or overstatement in the second sentence suggests that he will try to motivate the audience to join the fight against injustice.

  The hyperbole or overstatement in the second sentence suggests that he will try to motivate the audience to join the fight against injustice. - no response given

Which choice best shows how a persuasive speech benefits from a compare-and-contrast structure?

• It helps the speaker to methodically explain to the audience why one idea or approach is better than the other.

• It makes persuading the reader with appeals to emotion much easier for the speaker.

• It allows the audience to think more clearly about the issues at stake than another type of structure.

• It helps the speaker make a logical appeal because this structure is best suited for that type of appeal.

Read the excerpt from "On Civil Disobedience."

Send us to prison and we will live there as in a paradise. Ask us to mount the scaffold and we will do so laughing.

Which choice best describes how this use of parallelism strengthens the message Gandhi is conveying?

• It demonstrates his rhetorical skills and establishes his authority.

• It connects related actions to emphasize his willingness to cooperate.

• It adds a soothing rhythm that matches his obliging tone.

• It contrasts government actions with peaceful responses.

Name that Fallacy!

A conclusion that is based on insufficient or biased evidence; in other words, rushing to a conclusion before all relevant facts are available.

• Hasty Generalization

• Either/ or

• Moral Equivalence

• Ad Populum

Name that Fallacy!

A conclusion that oversimplifies the argument by reducing it to only two sides or choices.

• Red Herring

• Moral Equivalence

• Ad Populum

• Either/ or

Name that Fallacy!

An argument that concludes that a fact, position, or proposition must be true because many people believe it.

• Hasty Generalization

• Ad Populum

• Moral Equivalence

• Red Herring

Name that Fallacy!

A comparison of minor misdeeds with major atrocities.

• Red Herring

• Moral Equivalence

• Hasty Generalization

• Either/ Or

Name that Fallacy!

A diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues, often by avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them.

• Either/ Or

• Ad Populum

• Red Herring

• Hasty Generalization

Definition: a mistaken belief or a false or miselading statement based on unsound evidence.

• Counterargument

• Concessions

• Logical Fallacy

• Rebuttal

Which type of evidence is based on personal accounts of incidents?

• appeals

• logical

• empirical

• anecdotal