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