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






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






3. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






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






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






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






7. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue






8. Appeal based on the credibility of the author






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






10. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue






11. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic






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






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






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






15. 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'






16. 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.






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






18. Information based on personal interpretation of facts






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






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






21. Appeal to the reader's emotions






22. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.






23. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.






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






25. 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.






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






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






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






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!'






30. 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.'






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






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






33. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident






34. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence






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






36. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






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






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






39. 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






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






41. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent






42. 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?






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






44. 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.






45. Appeal to reason






46. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source






47. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true






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






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






50. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another