Test your basic knowledge |

SAT Essay Logical Fallacies

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. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.






2. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident






3. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true






4. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.






5. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts






6. Appeal to the reader's emotions






7. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false






8. 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.






9. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to






10. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply






11. Information that can be objectively proven as true






12. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion






13. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?






14. 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.






15. 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?






16. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.






17. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent






18. Appeal to reason






19. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another






20. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue






21. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source






22. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






23. 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'






24. 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!'






25. 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.






26. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence






27. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?






28. 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.'






29. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence






30. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case






31. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue






32. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event






33. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it






34. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations






35. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course






36. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?






37. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist






38. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data






39. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic






40. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion






41. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause






42. 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.






43. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?






44. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






45. Writer encourages readers to accept a conclusion without any support






46. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed






47. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue






48. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea






49. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second






50. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)