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