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