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