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