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. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
False scenario
Special pleading
Red Herring
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
2. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Red Herring
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Ethos
3. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Either-or Reasoning
Composition
Inductive Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
4. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
Smoke screen
False authority
Undistributed Middle
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
5. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Appeal to the golden mean
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Division
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
6. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Stereotyping
Ad hominem
Special pleading
Vagueness
7. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Single cause
Ad hominem
Numbers
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
8. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Red herring
Division
Inductive Reasoning
Circular Reasoning
9. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Undistributed Middle
Ad hominem
Slippery Slope
10. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Hasty generalization
Stereotyping
Ad vericundium
Statistic
11. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Undistributed Middle
Pathos
Ad hominem
Red Herring
12. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Stereotyping
Either -or
Fact
Irrelevant Proof
13. 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'
Ad vericundium
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
Either-or Reasoning
14. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern
Anecdote
Division
Appeal to the golden mean
Vagueness
15. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Correlation as cause
Appeal to Authority
Cause-effect relationships
Ad hominem
16. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Smoke screen
Numbers
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Correlation as cause
17. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?
Either-or Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Irrelevant Proof
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
18. 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.
Anecdote
Fact
Statistic
Equivocation
19. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Either-or Reasoning
Prevalent Proof
Slippery slope
Slippery Slope
20. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent
Hasty generalization
Ad misericordia
Correlation as cause
False analogy
21. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Double standard
Equivocation
False analogy
Deductive Reasoning
22. 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.
Correlation as cause
Stereotyping
Appeal to Authority
Negative Proof
23. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Inductive Reasoning
Statistic
Circular Reasoning
Cause-effect relationships
24. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Oversimplification
Appeal to the golden mean
Special pleading
False authority
25. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Deductive Reasoning
Begging the question
Dog whistle
Negative Proof
26. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Nonsequiter
Dog whistle
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Oversimplification
27. 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.
Undistributed Middle
Dog whistle
False scenario
Statistic
28. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
False scenario
Numbers
Equivocation
Hasty generalization
29. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Hasty generalization
Circular Reasoning
Logos
30. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Ad populum
Opinion
31. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Slippery slope
Numbers
Anecdote
Irrelevant Proof
32. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Appeal to Authority
Circular Reasoning
Irrelevant Proof
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
33. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Begging the question
Inductive Reasoning
Circular Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
34. 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.
Correlation as cause
Straw man
Hasty generalization
Division
35. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Single cause
Either -or
Appeal to the golden mean
Pathos
36. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Deductive Reasoning
Ethos
Nonsequiter
Ad populum
37. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Oversimplification
Hasty generalization
Hasty generalization
Inductive Reasoning
38. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Hasty generalization
Correlation as cause
Cause-effect relationships
Ad misericordia
39. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
False authority
Genetic Fallacy
Stereotyping
Statistic
40. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Inductive Reasoning
Ad hominem
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Begging the question
41. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Composition
False scenario
Irrelevant Proof
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
42. Appeal to the reader's emotions
False scenario
Dog whistle
Division
Pathos
43. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Begging the question
Ad misericordia
Slippery Slope
Cause-effect relationships
44. 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
Slippery Slope
Statistic
Either -or
45. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Either-or Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Red herring
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
46. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Cause-effect relationships
Negative Proof
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
47. 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!'
Begging the question
False scenario
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Appeal to the golden mean
48. 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 Cause and Effect Reasoning
Red herring
Hasty generalization
Anecdote
49. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Prevalent Proof
Slippery Slope
Ad vericundium
50. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
Negative Proof
Equivocation
Appeal to Authority
Cause-effect relationships