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