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