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