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