Test your basic knowledge |

SAT Essay Logical Fallacies

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. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria






2. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience






3. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue






4. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course






5. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence






6. Appeal to reason






7. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to






8. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea






9. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue






10. 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'






11. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?






12. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






13. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion






14. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?






15. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?






16. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case






17. 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.






18. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent






19. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data






20. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause






21. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.






22. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts






23. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second






24. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic






25. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true






26. 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






27. Writer encourages readers to accept a conclusion without any support






28. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.






29. 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!'






30. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue






31. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented






32. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue






33. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?






34. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations






35. 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.'






36. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed






37. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)






38. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false






39. Appeal based on the credibility of the author






40. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source






41. Information based on personal interpretation of facts






42. 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.






43. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






44. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right






45. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it






46. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another






47. Appeal to the reader's emotions






48. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion






49. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence






50. 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?