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