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