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. Appeal to reason






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






3. 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






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






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






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






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






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






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






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






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






12. Information that can be objectively proven as true






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






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






15. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident






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






17. 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.






18. 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?






19. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply






20. 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.






21. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






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'






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






24. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase






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






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






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






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






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. 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.






31. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event






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






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






34. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






35. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data






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






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






38. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.






39. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria






40. 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.






41. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue






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






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






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






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






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






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






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






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






50. Appeal based on the credibility of the author