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