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: absence of evidence is not evidence; he didn't say that... so it must be false
Negative Proof
Correlation as cause
Ethos
Ad hominem
2. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Red herring
Logos
Appeal to Authority
Inductive Reasoning
3. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Stereotyping
Ad misericordia
Single cause
Hasty generalization
4. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Fact
Hasty generalization
Division
Either-or Reasoning
5. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Equivocation
Composition
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Double standard
6. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Red herring
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Equivocation
Hasty generalization
7. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Values
False analogy
Fact
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
8. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Single cause
Cause-effect relationships
Ad hominem
9. 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.
Hasty generalization
Equivocation
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Nonsequiter
10. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Slippery slope
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad hominem
Prevalent Proof
11. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Special pleading
Hasty generalization
Prevalent Proof
Numbers
12. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Slippery slope
Slippery Slope
Statistic
Ad hominem
13. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue
Special pleading
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad hominem
Cause-effect relationships
14. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Composition
Single cause
Statistic
Equivocation
15. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Hasty generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Statistic
Either-or Reasoning
16. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Values
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Red herring
Division
17. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Smoke screen
Anecdote
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Red herring
18. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Red Herring
Ad hominem
Statistic
Either -or
19. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Nonsequiter
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Either-or Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
20. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Ad misericordia
Either-or Reasoning
False analogy
Ad populum
21. Appeal to reason
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Logos
Dog whistle
Either -or
22. 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?
Statistic
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
False analogy
23. 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.
Values
Straw man
Stereotyping
Ethos
24. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Deductive Reasoning
Composition
Inductive Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
25. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
False authority
Vagueness
Red Herring
Either -or
26. 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!'
Opinion
Deductive Reasoning
Negative Proof
False scenario
27. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Deductive Reasoning
Appeal to the golden mean
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Either -or
28. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Red Herring
False authority
Ad hominem
29. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
False scenario
Equivocation
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Stereotyping
30. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad hominem
Statistic
False scenario
31. 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
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Deductive Reasoning
Single cause
32. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Division
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Vagueness
Equivocation
33. 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.
Pathos
Dog whistle
Logos
False scenario
34. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion
Ad populum
Statistic
Nonsequiter
Stereotyping
35. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it
Ethos
Statistic
Division
Genetic Fallacy
36. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Dog whistle
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ad populum
Prevalent Proof
37. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Values
Negative Proof
Division
Red Herring
38. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Stereotyping
Ad vericundium
Opinion
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
39. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Anecdote
Opinion
Either-or Reasoning
Red Herring
40. 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
Double standard
Opinion
Correlation as cause
Negative Proof
41. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Appeal to the golden mean
Logos
False analogy
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
42. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Genetic Fallacy
Statistic
Irrelevant Proof
Oversimplification
43. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to
False authority
Stereotyping
Double standard
Slippery slope
44. 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.'
Hasty generalization
Either -or
Begging the question
Ad hominem
45. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Composition
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Ethos
Fact
46. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Irrelevant Proof
Genetic Fallacy
Either-or Reasoning
47. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
False authority
Hasty generalization
Appeal to the golden mean
Oversimplification
48. Appeal to the reader's emotions
Dog whistle
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
False analogy
Pathos
49. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Slippery Slope
Ad vericundium
Irrelevant Proof
Fact
50. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ethos
Ad misericordia
Circular Reasoning