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