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