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