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