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