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. 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.'
Hasty generalization
Values
Ad hominem
Anecdote
2. Ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations of a repeated word or phrase
Equivocation
Undistributed Middle
Stereotyping
Red herring
3. Appeal to the the pity - sympathy or 'misery' of the audience
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ethos
Ad misericordia
Appeal to the golden mean
4. Information the writer asserts as being the result of an event
Either-or Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
Begging the question
Cause-effect relationships
5. 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?
Red herring
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
6. Common knowledge or beliefs readers accept as true
Equivocation
Values
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Inductive Reasoning
7. 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.
Cause-effect relationships
Straw man
Pathos
Genetic Fallacy
8. Cause and Effect: claim than an event with more than one cause has only one cause
False authority
Composition
Single cause
Double standard
9. Stating the only two interpretations of actions are alternatives - ignoring any compromise or moderate course
Appeal to Authority
Either-or Reasoning
Prevalent Proof
Special pleading
10. Appeal to the reader's emotions
Pathos
Correlation as cause
Begging the question
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
11. Reasoning by Proof: the evidence offered does not really support the claim. Non Sequitur (It does not follow)
Composition
Irrelevant Proof
Red Herring
Ad hominem
12. Fallacy that asserts that given two positions - there exists a compromise between them which must be correct.
Appeal to the golden mean
Deductive Reasoning
Circular Reasoning
Begging the question
13. Citing an expert on one subject as expert on another
False authority
Ad vericundium
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Ethos
14. Appeal based on the credibility of the author
Dog whistle
Ethos
Stereotyping
Vagueness
15. Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence; using all instances when only some apply
Nonsequiter
Cause-effect relationships
Hasty generalization
Smoke screen
16. 'To the people' appeal to the prejudices of the audience - or claiming that (or a majority) supports your opinion
Equivocation
Either-or Reasoning
Ad populum
Begging the question
17. Have all reasonable alternatives been considered/eliminated? Does this author attack the other views in a fair way?
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Ad hominem
Nonsequiter
Special pleading
18. Any diversion intended to distract attention from the main issue
Red Herring
Equivocation
False analogy
Ad populum
19. Claiming that one step in the wrong direction will lead to another - potentially disastrous consequence
Nonsequiter
False scenario
Begging the question
Slippery slope
20. Reasoning by Proof: an argument that because someone worked hard at something - their conclusions must be right
Negative Proof
Vagueness
Numbers
False analogy
21. Information gained from personal experience representing a general pattern
Hasty generalization
Double standard
Anecdote
Division
22. Generalization: an argument that ignores all unfavorable evidence
Negative Proof
Correlation as cause
Special pleading
Oversimplification
23. A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
Evaluating Reasoning by Proof/Authority
Slippery Slope
Special pleading
Ethos
24. Concealing the author's true intent - belief - or attitude towards an issue
Smoke screen
Special pleading
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Equivocation
25. Trying to prove one idea with another idea that is too similar to the first idea
Division
Circular Reasoning
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
26. Cause and Effect: Assuming that an incident that precedes another is the cause of the second incident
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Pathos
Ad hominem
27. 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
Prevalent Proof
Smoke screen
Deductive Reasoning
Correlation as cause
28. 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.
Red Herring
Values
Opinion
Dog whistle
29. Generalization: Assumes that an individual must have a characteristic because the group to which he or she belongs supposedly has that characteristic
Double standard
Division
Either -or
Circular Reasoning
30. Appeal to reason
Red Herring
Logos
Hasty generalization
Ethos
31. Statements that are intentionally vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations
Appeal to Authority
Anecdote
Vagueness
Ethos
32. 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.
Ethos
Equivocation
Opinion
Cause-effect relationships
33. 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'
Anecdote
Evaluating Reasoning by Debate
Single cause
Undistributed Middle
34. 'it does not follow' drawing a conclusion or making a transition that is not a logical result of the facts
Numbers
Negative Proof
Ad vericundium
Nonsequiter
35. Information that is an interpretation of numerical data
Statistic
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning
Prevalent Proof
Correlation as cause
36. Generalization: Assumes that members of a group must have a characteristic because one or more of its members has that characteristic.
Composition
Deductive Reasoning
Red herring
Equivocation
37. How similar or how different are the cases being compared? How many point of comparison is the arguer using?
Evaluating Reasoning by Comparison
Single cause
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Circular Reasoning
38. Reasoning in which a conclusion is reached by stating a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case
Irrelevant Proof
Deductive Reasoning
Ethos
Cause-effect relationships
39. 'After this therefore because of this' implying that because on event follows another - the first caused the second
Values
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Double standard
Correlation as cause
40. Introducing an irrelevant point to divert readers' attention from the main issue being discussed
Red herring
False scenario
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Undistributed Middle
41. 'To the authority' appeal based on the authority of a source
Fact
Correlation as cause
Ad vericundium
Negative Proof
42. Reasoning by Debate: A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
Either -or
Ad hominem
Circular Reasoning
Values
43. Logical reasoning that establishes specific facts or contentions leading to a general conclusion
Inductive Reasoning
Correlation as cause
Evaluating Reasoning by Generalization
Ad hominem
44. Information that can be objectively proven as true
Fact
Oversimplification
Equivocation
Single cause
45. Everybody knows fallacy. Asserts that some idea is common knowledge - so it must be true.
False scenario
Genetic Fallacy
Straw man
Prevalent Proof
46. Two comparable issues or ideas are judged by different criteria
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Dog whistle
Composition
Double standard
47. Information based on personal interpretation of facts
Appeal to Authority
Equivocation
Opinion
Either -or
48. 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!'
Genetic Fallacy
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Ad populum
False scenario
49. Generalization: drawing conclusions based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
Correlation as cause
Hasty generalization
Pathos
Undistributed Middle
50. Obscuring or denying the complexity of an issue
Deductive Reasoning
Oversimplification
Equivocation
Evaluating Cause and Effect Reasoning