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