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. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?
Ad misericordia
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Undistributed Middle
Fact
2. Writer encourages readers to accept a conclusion without any support
Begging the question
Undistributed Middle
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Inductive Reasoning
3. 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'
Logos
Correlation as cause
Inductive Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
4. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
Ad misericordia
Stereotyping
Hasty generalization
Ethos
5. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Division
Double standard
Ad populum
Composition
6. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Pathos
Nonsequiter
Stereotyping
7. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
Vagueness
False authority
Ad hominem
Slippery Slope
8. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Logos
Deductive Reasoning
Equivocation
Undistributed Middle
9. When a writer uses the same term in two different senses in an argument. i.e. People choose what laws they obey. The Law of Gravity is a law. I choose to disobey the law of gravity.
Equivocation
Irrelevant Proof
Ethos
Inductive Reasoning
10. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Straw man
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Composition
Red herring
11. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Single cause
Equivocation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ad hominem
12. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Ad misericordia
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Oversimplification
Dog whistle
13. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Anecdote
Equivocation
Ethos
Appeal to Authority
14. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Statistic
Fact
Double standard
Ad misericordia
15. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
Prevalent Proof
Inductive Reasoning
Either -or
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
16. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern
Anecdote
Straw man
Ad hominem
Hasty generalization
17. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Values
Composition
Circular Reasoning
Opinion
18. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Genetic Fallacy
Deductive Reasoning
Ad hominem
Ad misericordia
19. 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?
Appeal to Authority
Pathos
Slippery Slope
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
20. 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
Pathos
Correlation as cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Vagueness
21. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Special pleading
Ad hominem
Ad vericundium
22. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Logos
Negative Proof
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Begging the question
23. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Fact
Deductive Reasoning
Genetic Fallacy
24. Appeal to reason
Nonsequiter
Ad hominem
Logos
Oversimplification
25. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion
Ad populum
Correlation as cause
Prevalent Proof
Red Herring
26. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Negative Proof
Logos
Undistributed Middle
Appeal to the golden mean
27. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Red herring
Vagueness
False authority
Ad vericundium
28. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Smoke screen
Appeal to the golden mean
Special pleading
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
29. 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.'
Opinion
Nonsequiter
Ad hominem
Ad misericordia
30. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Hasty generalization
Circular Reasoning
Ethos
Division
31. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Either -or
Red Herring
Prevalent Proof
Values
32. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
Composition
Equivocation
Negative Proof
Circular Reasoning
33. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Cause-effect relationships
Vagueness
Either -or
34. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Red herring
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Appeal to the golden mean
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
35. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Smoke screen
Ad misericordia
Slippery Slope
False scenario
36. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Correlation as cause
Prevalent Proof
Inductive Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
37. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Opinion
Appeal to the golden mean
Slippery slope
Stereotyping
38. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ad hominem
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Fact
39. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Negative Proof
Opinion
Statistic
Red herring
40. 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.
Straw man
Ethos
Equivocation
Statistic
41. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Special pleading
Red Herring
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Inductive Reasoning
42. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Logos
Opinion
Genetic Fallacy
Vagueness
43. Appeal to the reader's emotions
Nonsequiter
Deductive Reasoning
Pathos
Slippery Slope
44. 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.
Red herring
Appeal to Authority
Negative Proof
Logos
45. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Composition
Numbers
Smoke screen
Hasty generalization
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!'
False scenario
Cause-effect relationships
Genetic Fallacy
Circular Reasoning
47. 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
Hasty generalization
False analogy
Single cause
48. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Equivocation
Circular Reasoning
Pathos
Undistributed Middle
49. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Special pleading
Ethos
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Oversimplification
50. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Hasty generalization
Cause-effect relationships
Stereotyping
Slippery Slope