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