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