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
Oversimplification
Ad hominem
Slippery Slope
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
2. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Logos
Ad hominem
Values
3. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Composition
False analogy
Straw man
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
4. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Equivocation
Inductive Reasoning
False analogy
Ethos
5. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
Undistributed Middle
Either -or
Appeal to the golden mean
False authority
6. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?
Special pleading
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Either -or
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
7. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
Composition
Anecdote
Equivocation
Fact
8. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Ad populum
Fact
Slippery slope
Ethos
9. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent
False analogy
Pathos
False authority
Appeal to the golden mean
10. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Appeal to Authority
Appeal to the golden mean
Numbers
Ad vericundium
11. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Opinion
Ad populum
Red herring
12. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
Prevalent Proof
Numbers
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Ethos
13. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Ad hominem
Ad misericordia
Special pleading
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
14. 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'
Composition
Vagueness
Equivocation
Undistributed Middle
15. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Red Herring
Red herring
Composition
Nonsequiter
16. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Undistributed Middle
Special pleading
Appeal to the golden mean
Nonsequiter
17. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Hasty generalization
Correlation as cause
Inductive Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
18. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Fact
Either-or Reasoning
Slippery Slope
Nonsequiter
19. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Genetic Fallacy
Ad populum
Red herring
Appeal to Authority
20. 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
Smoke screen
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Ad misericordia
21. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Ethos
Double standard
Hasty generalization
Statistic
22. 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.'
Special pleading
Slippery slope
Cause-effect relationships
Ad hominem
23. Appeal to reason
Logos
Hasty generalization
Appeal to Authority
Division
24. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Equivocation
Red Herring
Anecdote
Either-or Reasoning
25. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Hasty generalization
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ad populum
Single cause
26. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Ethos
False analogy
Equivocation
Ad misericordia
27. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Fact
Ethos
Statistic
Prevalent Proof
28. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Composition
Vagueness
Ethos
Logos
29. 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!'
False authority
False scenario
Ad populum
False analogy
30. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Ad hominem
Appeal to the golden mean
Oversimplification
False authority
31. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Single cause
Special pleading
Deductive Reasoning
Oversimplification
32. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
False analogy
Appeal to Authority
Red herring
33. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Anecdote
Circular Reasoning
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Slippery Slope
34. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Ad hominem
Red Herring
Hasty generalization
Irrelevant Proof
35. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Division
Negative Proof
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Inductive Reasoning
36. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
Ad populum
Begging the question
False authority
Ad hominem
37. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Straw man
Appeal to the golden mean
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Statistic
38. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion
Fact
Pathos
Ad hominem
Ad populum
39. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Smoke screen
Equivocation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Values
40. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Fact
Deductive Reasoning
Special pleading
Prevalent Proof
41. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Hasty generalization
Cause-effect relationships
Values
Slippery slope
42. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Smoke screen
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Double standard
Vagueness
43. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Vagueness
Circular Reasoning
Negative Proof
Ad populum
44. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Statistic
Ad hominem
Oversimplification
Negative Proof
45. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
Smoke screen
Single cause
Values
Stereotyping
46. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Negative Proof
Opinion
Circular Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning
47. 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.
Straw man
Appeal to Authority
Ad populum
Opinion
48. 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 hominem
Straw man
Ad hominem
Double standard
49. 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.
Nonsequiter
Equivocation
Numbers
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
50. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Either-or Reasoning
Division
Irrelevant Proof
Ad populum