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