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