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