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