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