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