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