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