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