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