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