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