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