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