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. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Special pleading
Begging the question
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Oversimplification
2. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Anecdote
Stereotyping
Cause-effect relationships
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
3. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent
Division
Opinion
False analogy
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
4. 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.
Logos
Straw man
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Circular Reasoning
5. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Hasty generalization
Nonsequiter
Red herring
Ad vericundium
6. 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.
Genetic Fallacy
Equivocation
Dog whistle
Fact
7. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
False authority
Negative Proof
Composition
Double standard
8. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Vagueness
Hasty generalization
Nonsequiter
9. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Equivocation
False authority
Dog whistle
Ad vericundium
10. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Irrelevant Proof
Dog whistle
Ad misericordia
Stereotyping
11. Appeal to reason
Fact
Ad hominem
Composition
Logos
12. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Slippery Slope
Deductive Reasoning
Fact
Appeal to the golden mean
13. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
False analogy
Appeal to the golden mean
Circular Reasoning
14. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Ad hominem
Deductive Reasoning
Double standard
Ethos
15. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Red Herring
Equivocation
Composition
Logos
16. 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?
Undistributed Middle
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Single cause
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
17. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Red Herring
Opinion
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad hominem
18. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Ad misericordia
Deductive Reasoning
Stereotyping
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
19. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Fact
Single cause
Red Herring
Deductive Reasoning
20. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
Equivocation
Fact
Pathos
Single cause
21. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Ad misericordia
Single cause
Hasty generalization
22. 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'
False analogy
Inductive Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
23. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Nonsequiter
Inductive Reasoning
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
24. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Begging the question
Fact
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Correlation as cause
25. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
Logos
Prevalent Proof
Ad misericordia
Dog whistle
26. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Negative Proof
Anecdote
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
27. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Circular Reasoning
Numbers
Ad vericundium
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
28. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
Division
Equivocation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Stereotyping
29. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Composition
Ad vericundium
Division
30. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Appeal to Authority
Either-or Reasoning
Composition
Either -or
31. 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.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Division
Appeal to Authority
Ad vericundium
32. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Logos
Double standard
Oversimplification
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
33. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Hasty generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Genetic Fallacy
Correlation as cause
34. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Anecdote
Stereotyping
Smoke screen
35. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Double standard
Smoke screen
Appeal to the golden mean
Cause-effect relationships
36. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Anecdote
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Circular Reasoning
Nonsequiter
37. Appeal to the reader's emotions
Pathos
False scenario
Slippery Slope
Cause-effect relationships
38. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Ad hominem
Values
Anecdote
Ad hominem
39. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Either -or
Cause-effect relationships
Ethos
40. 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
Division
Correlation as cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Equivocation
41. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it
Genetic Fallacy
Appeal to Authority
Ad misericordia
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
42. 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.'
Stereotyping
Ad hominem
Values
Either -or
43. 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
Smoke screen
Dog whistle
Ad misericordia
44. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
Slippery slope
Either -or
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Statistic
45. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
False analogy
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Vagueness
Oversimplification
46. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Stereotyping
Inductive Reasoning
Slippery slope
Statistic
47. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Red herring
False authority
Numbers
Vagueness
48. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?
Circular Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
False authority
Inductive Reasoning
49. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Numbers
Negative Proof
Ad populum
Correlation as cause
50. 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!'
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad vericundium
Stereotyping
False scenario