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