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