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