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