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