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. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Slippery slope
Hasty generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Smoke screen
2. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Smoke screen
Fact
Ad populum
Numbers
3. Appeal to the reader's emotions
Ad misericordia
Pathos
Ad hominem
Logos
4. 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.
Red herring
Appeal to Authority
Nonsequiter
Either -or
5. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
Either -or
Cause-effect relationships
Hasty generalization
Ethos
6. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Special pleading
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Red herring
Stereotyping
7. 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.
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Ad populum
Equivocation
Dog whistle
8. 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.
Single cause
Values
False scenario
Dog whistle
9. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Hasty generalization
Statistic
Red Herring
Values
10. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Opinion
Hasty generalization
Ad misericordia
Pathos
11. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Inductive Reasoning
Division
Genetic Fallacy
Negative Proof
12. Appeal to reason
False analogy
Logos
Nonsequiter
Smoke screen
13. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?
Ethos
Correlation as cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Appeal to the golden mean
14. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Hasty generalization
Cause-effect relationships
Appeal to the golden mean
Deductive Reasoning
15. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Ethos
Single cause
Special pleading
Anecdote
16. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
Prevalent Proof
Undistributed Middle
Hasty generalization
Nonsequiter
17. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent
False analogy
Ad populum
Special pleading
Equivocation
18. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Deductive Reasoning
Ad misericordia
Appeal to Authority
Red Herring
19. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
Ad vericundium
Stereotyping
Equivocation
Equivocation
20. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Pathos
Vagueness
Logos
Slippery slope
21. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Deductive Reasoning
Ad populum
Composition
Stereotyping
22. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Slippery Slope
Inductive Reasoning
Numbers
Either-or Reasoning
23. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Circular Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
Red herring
Appeal to Authority
24. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Irrelevant Proof
Slippery slope
Red Herring
Pathos
25. 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?
Slippery slope
False scenario
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
26. 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!'
False scenario
Slippery slope
Genetic Fallacy
Numbers
27. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Vagueness
Division
Oversimplification
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
28. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern
Equivocation
Anecdote
Hasty generalization
Numbers
29. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Vagueness
Either-or Reasoning
Equivocation
Division
30. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Slippery Slope
Values
Nonsequiter
Correlation as cause
31. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Ad vericundium
Double standard
Circular Reasoning
Undistributed Middle
32. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Cause-effect relationships
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Anecdote
Statistic
33. 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.
Genetic Fallacy
Composition
Straw man
Ad populum
34. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
False scenario
Equivocation
Prevalent Proof
Inductive Reasoning
35. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Fact
Ad populum
Equivocation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
36. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
False analogy
False scenario
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
37. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
Single cause
Cause-effect relationships
Irrelevant Proof
Slippery Slope
38. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Inductive Reasoning
Stereotyping
Vagueness
Hasty generalization
39. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Oversimplification
Pathos
Ad populum
Genetic Fallacy
40. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Irrelevant Proof
Red herring
Composition
Appeal to Authority
41. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Either -or
Opinion
Ad hominem
Circular Reasoning
42. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Double standard
Inductive Reasoning
Cause-effect relationships
Slippery slope
43. Reasoning by Proof: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Ad populum
Inductive Reasoning
Negative Proof
Composition
44. 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
Stereotyping
Circular Reasoning
Begging the question
Correlation as cause
45. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Anecdote
Pathos
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Division
46. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Ad hominem
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Double standard
Vagueness
47. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it
Hasty generalization
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Genetic Fallacy
Appeal to Authority
48. 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.'
Vagueness
Ad hominem
Statistic
Hasty generalization
49. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
False scenario
Fact
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Equivocation
50. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Opinion
Ethos
Hasty generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization