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