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