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