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