SUBJECTS
|
BROWSE
|
CAREER CENTER
|
POPULAR
|
JOIN
|
LOGIN
Business Skills
|
Soft Skills
|
Basic Literacy
|
Certifications
About
|
Help
|
Privacy
|
Terms
|
Email
Search
Test your basic knowledge |
SAT Essay Logical Fallacies
Start Test
Study First
Subjects
:
sat
,
english
,
writing-skills
Instructions:
Answer 50 questions in 15 minutes.
If you are not ready to take this test, you can
study here
.
Match each statement with the correct term.
Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.
This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Division
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Numbers
Values
2. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Nonsequiter
Ad misericordia
Ad hominem
Anecdote
3. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Ad misericordia
Prevalent Proof
Double standard
Correlation as cause
4. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
Negative Proof
Stereotyping
Equivocation
Equivocation
5. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it
Ad hominem
Statistic
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Genetic Fallacy
6. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
False authority
Red herring
Smoke screen
7. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Appeal to Authority
Cause-effect relationships
Appeal to the golden mean
Division
8. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Undistributed Middle
Either-or Reasoning
Special pleading
Slippery Slope
9. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Single cause
Special pleading
Division
Irrelevant Proof
10. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Numbers
Hasty generalization
Double standard
Fact
11. Is there a reasonable connection between the cause and the effect? Is that connection explained? Are there other possible causes that have not been considered?
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Oversimplification
Correlation as cause
Deductive Reasoning
12. Appeal to the reader's emotions
False analogy
Division
Pathos
Slippery Slope
13. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Straw man
Values
Fact
Ad populum
14. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Irrelevant Proof
Slippery slope
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
15. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
Vagueness
Values
Oversimplification
Either -or
16. Reasoning by Debate: When a writer argues against a claim that nobody actually holds or is universally considered weak. Setting up a straw man diverts attention from the real issues.
Ad hominem
Straw man
False analogy
Numbers
17. False transitive property - you assume that just because two things share a characteristic - all of their characteristics are shared: - 'penguins are black and white - old tv shows are black and white - therefore penguins are old tv shows'
Slippery Slope
Straw man
Undistributed Middle
Single cause
18. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Cause-effect relationships
Negative Proof
Dog whistle
Either-or Reasoning
19. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Irrelevant Proof
Composition
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Smoke screen
20. Reasoning by Proof: A fallacy in which a speaker or writer seeks to persuade not by giving evidence but by appealing to the respect people have for a person or institution.
False scenario
Appeal to Authority
Vagueness
Values
21. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Either -or
Slippery slope
Circular Reasoning
22. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Deductive Reasoning
Composition
Genetic Fallacy
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
23. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Oversimplification
False authority
Hasty generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
24. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Negative Proof
Composition
Division
Appeal to the golden mean
25. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Appeal to the golden mean
Division
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Deductive Reasoning
26. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Circular Reasoning
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ethos
Either-or Reasoning
27. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion
Slippery Slope
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Numbers
Ad populum
28. The use by a speaker of coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has a different (and negative) meaning for a targeted subgroup of the audience.
Dog whistle
Smoke screen
Pathos
Oversimplification
29. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern
Either -or
Anecdote
Slippery Slope
Undistributed Middle
30. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Ad vericundium
Hasty generalization
Ad populum
Deductive Reasoning
31. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Ad misericordia
Either-or Reasoning
Division
Nonsequiter
32. Reasoning by Debate: In an argument - this is an attack on the person rather than on the opponent's ideas. It comes from the Latin meaning 'against the man.'
Ad hominem
Red herring
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Red Herring
33. Cause and Effect: A fallacy that assumes that because two variables are correlated (happen at the same time) that one must have caused the other
Composition
Correlation as cause
Fact
Special pleading
34. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
Single cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
False authority
Prevalent Proof
35. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Smoke screen
Statistic
Ad hominem
Equivocation
36. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Red Herring
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Correlation as cause
Prevalent Proof
37. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Smoke screen
Equivocation
Appeal to the golden mean
38. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Hasty generalization
Ethos
Numbers
Correlation as cause
39. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Prevalent Proof
Either-or Reasoning
Stereotyping
Red herring
40. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Ad populum
Double standard
Genetic Fallacy
Negative Proof
41. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent
Appeal to the golden mean
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Undistributed Middle
False analogy
42. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Division
Slippery slope
Ad hominem
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
43. Appeal to reason
Equivocation
Logos
Slippery Slope
Division
44. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Irrelevant Proof
Vagueness
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
45. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
Division
Either -or
Logos
False authority
46. Cause and Effect: 'What if' fallacy. Argues that everything would be different if one variable was different. Example: 'If the Nazis had won WWII - we'd all be speaking German!'
Opinion
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
False scenario
Vagueness
47. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Hasty generalization
Either-or Reasoning
Circular Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
48. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Vagueness
Inductive Reasoning
Either -or
Begging the question
49. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Ad vericundium
Values
Undistributed Middle
Logos
50. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Slippery Slope
Undistributed Middle
Values
Vagueness