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