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