Test your basic knowledge |

SAT Essay Logical Fallacies

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: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident






2. Appeal to reason






3. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to






4. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations






5. 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.'






6. Appeal to the reader's emotions






7. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event






8. 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.






9. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






10. 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






11. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false






12. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented






13. 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?






14. 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.






15. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right






16. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?






17. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?






18. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts






19. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion






20. Information based on personal interpretation of facts






21. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause






22. 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.






23. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)






24. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?






25. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.






26. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply






27. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase






28. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist






29. 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'






30. Appeal based on the credibility of the author






31. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it






32. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria






33. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue






34. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?






35. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion






36. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea






37. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course






38. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent






39. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second






40. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue






41. Writer encourages readers to accept a conclusion without any support






42. Information that can be objectively proven as true






43. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case






44. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience






45. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed






46. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true






47. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence






48. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






49. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data






50. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue