Test your basic knowledge |

SAT Essay Logical Fallacies

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.'






2. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.






3. Appeal to the reader's emotions






4. Prejudging an individual based on ideas one has about the group the individual belongs to






5. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue






6. Appeal based on the credibility of the author






7. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence






8. 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.






9. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence






10. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data






11. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause






12. How large is the sample size? How representative is the sample?






13. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case






14. 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?






15. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented






16. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another






17. Condemning an argument because of where it began - how it began - or who began it






18. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right






19. Appeal to reason






20. Analogy or comparison that is not logically consistent






21. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion






22. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue






23. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist






24. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source






25. 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.






26. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second






27. 'Against the man' attacking the person or group to which you are opposed rather than addressing the issue






28. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true






29. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?






30. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts






31. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience






32. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue






33. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase






34. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course






35. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident






36. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations






37. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern






38. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea






39. Writer encourages readers to accept a conclusion without any support






40. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply






41. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria






42. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)






43. 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'






44. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence






45. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.






46. 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!'






47. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?






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.






49. Does the evidence prove the point being argued? Is this authority an expert on this particular topic?






50. Information that can be objectively proven as true