Logical Fallacies逻辑谬误

合集下载

常见逻辑谬误中英对照Fallacy

常见逻辑谬误中英对照Fallacy

分散注意力 的 谬 误 ( F a l l a c i e s of D i s t r a c t i o n )为多于一个答案的问题提供不足(通常两个)的选择,即是隐藏了一些选择,最典型的表现是非黑即白观点除正邪之争外,还有邪邪之争及许多难分正邪的纷争,所以不能单以萨达姆邪恶便认定美军正义总有些事是既不能否定,亦不能肯定的。

除了肯定和否定,我们还可以存疑吧!错谬:不合理使用连串因果关系例子:迟到的学生要判死刑。

因为迟到是不用功的表现;将来工作也不勤力;不勤力导致公司损失;公司损失就会倒闭;公 司倒闭会使人失业;失业造成家庭问题;家庭问题导致自杀率上升,为了防止自杀率上升,我们应判迟到的学生死刑。

解释:滑坡谬误中假定了连串 “可能性 ”为“必然性”。

比方说,迟到是否 “必然”是不用功的表现?将来工作又是否 “必然”不勤力?答案可想而知。

例子虽然夸张,但其实许多时候大家亦会犯相同错误而不自知。

复合问题( Complex Question )错谬:一条问题内包含两个无关的重点。

例子:你还有没有干那非法勾当?(你有干非法勾当吗?是否还有继续?)解释:简单的一句提问,其实隐藏了两个问题。

你给予其中一条问题的答案,并不一定和另外一条的一样。

例如你有干非法 勾当,但未必等于你还有继续。

诉诸其他支持( Appeals to Motives in Place of Support )诉诸势力( Appeal to Force )错谬:以势力服人两难推理( False Dilemma )例子:萨达姆是邪恶的,所以美军是正义之师诉诸无知( From Ignorance ) 错谬:因为不能否定,所以必然肯定,反之亦然 例子: 没有人能证明鬼不存在,那么鬼肯定存在 滑坡谬误( Slippery Slope )错谬: 解释: 解释:例子:若你不想被解雇,你必须认同公司的制度解释:这是以工作机会强迫员工认同制度,员工不是依据制度好坏来决定认同与否。

Logical Fallacies逻辑谬误

Logical Fallacies逻辑谬误
Stereotypes about people (“pilot students are handsome," "grad students are nerdy," etc.) are common examples of hasty generalization.
Example
"My roommate said her philosophy class was hard, and the one I'm in is hard, too. All philosophy classes must be hard!"
Examples
President Jones raised taxes, and then the rate of violent crime went up. Jones is responsible for the rise in crime.
The increase in taxes might or might not be one factor in the rising crime rates, but the argument hasn't shown us that one caused the other.
for example, if I register for a class, and my name later appears on the roll, it's true that the first event caused the one that came later.
But sometimes two events that seem related in time aren't really related as cause and effect. That is, correlation isn't the same thing as causation.

逻辑谬误英语作文乐队花车

逻辑谬误英语作文乐队花车

逻辑谬误英语作文乐队花车Title: Logical Fallacies in the English Essay on Parade Floats and Bands。

In discussing the topic of parade floats and marching bands, it's essential to maintain logical coherence to convey a compelling argument. However, it's not uncommonfor logical fallacies to sneak into essays, undermining the effectiveness of the writer's message. In this essay, we'll explore various logical fallacies that may arise in discussions about parade floats and bands.1. Ad Hominem: This fallacy occurs when the writer attacks the character or personal traits of those who hold opposing views rather than addressing the substance of the argument. For instance, stating that a particular band's performance is terrible because the conductor is unattractive would be an ad hominem fallacy.2. False Dilemma: Also known as black-and-whitethinking, this fallacy presents only two options when more exist. For example, arguing that parade floats are either entirely traditional or entirely modern neglects the possibility of a blend of both styles.3. Hasty Generalization: Drawing a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence characterizes this fallacy. An example would be asserting that all marching bands from a certain region lack talent based on a single performance.4. Appeal to Tradition: This fallacy argues that a practice or belief must be valid because "it's always been done that way." For instance, claiming that a particular float design is superior simply because it's been used for decades overlooks the potential for innovation.5. Appeal to Authority: Relying on the opinion of an authority figure rather than on evidence is an appeal to authority fallacy. If an essay asserts that a certain band is excellent because a celebrity said so without providing any further evidence, it commits this fallacy.6. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: Latin for "after this, therefore because of this," this fallacy assumes that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second. For instance, arguing that the presence of a specific float led to increased attendance at a parade without considering other factors would be a post hoc fallacy.7. Straw Man: This fallacy misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. For example, claiming that those who advocate for more modern parade floats wantto eliminate all traditional elements misrepresents the nuanced position of modernization advocates.8. Bandwagon Fallacy: This fallacy argues that because something is popular or widely believed, it must be correct. Claiming that a particular band is excellent solely because it has a large fan base commits this fallacy.9. Circular Reasoning: This occurs when the writer restates the argument rather than providing evidence to support it. For example, asserting that a parade float isthe best because it's the most popular without offering reasons why it's popular engages in circular reasoning.Avoiding these logical fallacies is crucial for constructing a persuasive and intellectually honest essay on parade floats and marching bands. By critically evaluating arguments and evidence, writers can create more compelling and convincing narratives that engage readers and promote meaningful dialogue.。

logical-fallacy

logical-fallacy
典型形式:“如果A那么B;B;所以A;”
例:“如果是油条,那么是好吃的;面包 Nhomakorabea好吃的;因此面包是油条。”这同样是对直言三段论的误用。
假两难推理
典型形式:“A或B或C;非A;所以B。”
这是对选言三段论的误用。选言三段论的形式是:“A或B;非A;所以B。”,级联起来则是这种形式:“P1或P2或P3……或Pn;非P2且非P3……且非Pn;所以P1。”用福尔摩斯的话说则是:“当排除了所有其它的可能性,还剩一个时,它就是真相,不管它看起来有多么的不可能。”
无效证明
这是一种在证明过程中利用“障眼法”,从而得出错误结论的诡辩手段。
例:证明1是最大的正整数。“假设最大的正整数不是1,而是a,有a > 1;a > 1 > 0,a为正的,所以由a > 1得到a * a > a;但是a * a还是正整数,可是没有任何正整数比a大,矛盾;所以,最大的正整数是1。”(留给各位去揪出“障眼法”之所在。)
目录1简介
2形式逻辑谬误
2.1否定前件谬误2.2肯定后件谬误2.3假两难推理3非形式逻辑谬误
3.1诉诸无知3.2循环论证3.3滑坡谬误3.4以偏概全3.5区群谬误3.6类比失当3.7诉诸公众3.8诉诸恐惧3.9诉诸怜悯3.10假诉诸权威3.11不相干谬误3.12后此谬误3.13无效证明1简介违反思维规律或逻辑规则的议论,尤其是指论证中不符合逻辑的推论。逻辑谬误[1]分为形式逻辑谬误与非形式逻辑谬误。
例:“你是石油公司的员工,你当然要声称全球变暖是假的”
辩论中常常出现的“稻草人”也是该谬误的一种。[2]
后此谬误
又称事后归因、假性因果。仅仅因为A事件先于B事件发生,就断定A事件是B事件的原因。
例:“九点的时候有一只蝴蝶扇动翅膀,十点的时候太平洋上有台风生成,所以蝴蝶扇动翅膀是导致台风生成的原因。”

高英-logic-fallacy-八大逻辑谬误

高英-logic-fallacy-八大逻辑谬误

滑坡谬误
总结词
指论证中假设一个初步行动会导致一系列不太可能的 后续事件,最终导致极端的负面结果。
详细描述
滑坡谬误是一种常见的逻辑谬误,表现为在论证中假 设一个初步行动会导致一系列不太可能的后续事件, 最终导致极端的负面结果。这种谬误的错误在于假设 初步行动必然导致负面结果,而没有提供足够的证据 来支持这一连串的事件必然发生。滑坡谬误常常出现 在政策辩论和商业决策中,由于缺乏足够的证据支持 ,因此这种推理方式并不具有说服力。
间的感受和安排。
假因谬误的案例分析
总结词
假因谬误是指将一个事件视为另一个事件发生的原因,尽管实际上两者并无因果关系。
详细描述
例如,有人认为“自从我开始戴这个护身符,我就没有感冒过”,认为护身符是防止感 冒的原因。但实际上,很可能只是巧合,护身符与不感冒并无因果关系。
倒置因果的案例分析
总结词
倒置因果是指将事件发生的顺序颠倒,错误地认为前一 事件是后一事件的原因。
高英-logicfallacy-八大逻辑谬 误
contents
目录
• 八大逻辑谬误概述 • 形式逻辑谬误 • 非形式逻辑谬误 • 应用与实践 • 案例分析
01
CATALOGUE
八大逻辑谬误概述
定义与特点
定义
逻辑谬误是指论证中存在的逻辑缺陷 或错误,导致论点或结论不可靠。
特点
逻辑谬误通常表现为推理过程中的不 合逻辑或不严谨,可能源于错误的推 理规则或概念使用不当。
要点二
详细描述
以人废言是指因为一个人的身份或观点而否定其言论的价 值或真实性。例如,有人可能会因为某位专家的政治立场 而否定其关于气候变化的观点,或者因为某位作家的性别 而否定其关于性别平等的观点。这种谬误忽略了言论本身 的逻辑和证据价值,而仅仅因为持有某种立场或观点的人 的身份而对其言论进行否定。

LogicalFallacies逻辑谬误

LogicalFallacies逻辑谬误

summary
Loose generalization/Dicto simpliciter(过度概括)
Post hoc fallacy/False cause
(牵强附会)
Weak/False analogy
(错误类比)
Bandwagon effect
(随波逐流)
Hasty Generalization
Guns are like hammers—they're both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammers—so restrictions on purchasing
It occurs when you state your position and then restate it in different words as your reason.
Excessive drinking is detrimental to health because it causes harm to the body.
common and quite persuasive at least to the casual readers or listeners
Girls are not good at science.
The Angel in the House?
Loose Generalization/Dicto Simpliciter(过度概括)
Backfire:
Para 129 hasty generalization

最新Logical Fallacies逻辑谬误

最新Logical Fallacies逻辑谬误
Logic (part four) Fallacies
Arguments, like men, are often pretenders. —Plato
ห้องสมุดไป่ตู้
What are fallacies?
Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. By learning to look for them in your own and others' writing, you can strengthen your ability to evaluate the arguments you make, read, and hear.
Accident
definition
When we apply a generalization to individual cases that it does not properly govern, we commit the fallacy of accident.
Almost every good rule has appropriate exceptions; we argue fallaciously when we reason on the supposition that some rules apply with universal force. Accident is the opposite of false generalization.
Examples
You can’t prove that God exists. Therefore he doesn’t exist. You can’t prove that God doesn’t exist. Therefore he exists. the story of Galileo

Logical_Fallacies逻辑谬误

Logical_Fallacies逻辑谬误
guns are equally ridiculous.
Logical FalsFea/wlleaakcyAnalogy(错误类比)
It presumes that if two things or people are alike in one or two ways, they will be
rather than being taken off guard .
羡慕嫉 妒有木

浪漫纯美 有米有
LOVE IS A FALLACY
Question time
What constitutes the argument, and what the relation between argument and fallacy? Argument consists of two parts:a conclusion and certain premises. An argument that fails to be conclusively deduced is invalid, which is said to be fallacious.
arguments
premises
conclusion
fail to provide conclusive evidence
LOGICAL FALLACIES
What are fallacies?
The logic is missing or something in the case is not clear.
alike in other ways too.
Page 72,Para 105~108
"Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations. After all , surgeons have X-rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house." " Doctors, lawyers,and carpenters aren't taking a test to see how much they have learned , but students are. The situations are altogether different, and you can't make an analogy between them."
  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

two special notes about fallacies
Fallacious arguments are very, very common and can be quite persuasive, at least to the casual reader or listener. You can find dozens of examples of fallacious reasoning in newspapers, advertisements, and other sources. There are many different kinds of fallacies with different names.
A flood happened after the comet appeared; therefore, the comet caused the flood. misunderstanding of the lunar eclipse
Tips
To avoid the post hoc fallacy, the arguer would need to give us some explanation of the process by which the tax increase is supposed to have produced higher crime rates. That's what you should do to avoid committing this fallacy: If you say that A causes B, you should have something more to say about how A caused B than just that A comes first and B comes latehen we apply a generalization to individual cases that it does not properly govern, we commit the fallacy of accident.
Almost every good rule has appropriate exceptions; we argue fallaciously when we reason on the supposition that some rules apply with universal force. Accident is the opposite of false generalization.
While guns and hammers do share certain features, these features (having metal parts, being tools, and being potentially useful for violence) are not the ones at stake in deciding whether to restrict guns. Rather, we restrict guns because they can easily be used to kill large numbers of people at a distance. This is a feature hammers do not share—it'd be hard to kill a crowd with a hammer. Thus, the analogy is weak, and so is the argument based on it.
Stereotypes about people (“pilot students are handsome," "grad students are nerdy," etc.) are common examples of hasty generalization.
Example
"My roommate said her philosophy class was hard, and the one I'm in is hard, too. All philosophy classes must be hard!"
Hasty Generalization
Definition
making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate (usually because it is atypical or just too small).
Notice that in the previous example, the more modest conclusion "Some philosophy classes are hard for some students" would not be a hasty generalization.
Logic (part four) Fallacies
Arguments, like men, are often pretenders. —Plato
What are fallacies?
Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. By learning to look for them in your own and others' writing, you can strengthen your ability to evaluate the arguments you make, read, and hear.
“All generalizations are false, including this one.” —Mark Twain
False cause/Post hoc (假性因果)
Definition
assuming that because B comes after A, A caused B Of course, sometimes one event really does cause another one that comes later.
for example, if I register for a class, and my name later appears on the roll, it's true that the first event caused the one that came later.
But sometimes two events that seem related in time aren't really related as cause and effect. That is, correlation isn't the same thing as causation.
Two persons’ experiences are, in this case, not enough on which to base a conclusion.
Smoking causes cancer because my father was a smoker and he died of lung cancer.
Argument from Ignorance
Definition
Argument from Ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not been proved false, or that it is false because it has not been proved true. In science and logic, we must verify the truth or falsehood of propositions; before that, nothing can be asserted. In jurisprudence, however, there is an exception: a person is always regarded as innocent before he/she is proved guilty.
Examples
President Jones raised taxes, and then the rate of violent crime went up. Jones is responsible for the rise in crime.
The increase in taxes might or might not be one factor in the rising crime rates, but the argument hasn't shown us that one caused the other.
Examples
You can’t prove that God exists. Therefore he doesn’t exist. You can’t prove that God doesn’t exist. Therefore he exists. the story of Galileo
Example
Guns are like hammers—they're both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammers—so restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous.
相关文档
最新文档