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