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