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