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