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