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