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